8048199: Replace anonymous inner classes with lambdas, where applicable, in JNDI #3416

c-cleary · 2021-04-09T13:15:16Z

Description

This fix is part of a previous effort to both cleanup/modernise JNDI code, the details of which can be seen in JDK-8048091. A number JNDI methods under java.naming use Anonymous Inner Classes in cases where only a single object unique to the requirements of the method is used. The issues these occurrences of AICs cause are highlighted below.

Issue

AICs, in the cases concerned with this fix, are used where only one operation is required. While AICs can be useful for more complex implementations (using interfaces, multiple methods needed, local fields etc.), Lambdas are better suited here as they result in a more readable and concise solution.

Fixes

Where applicable, occurrences of AICs were replaced with lambdas to address the issues above resulting primarily in more readable/concise code.

Progress

Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue
Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

JDK-8048199: Replace anonymous inner classes with lambdas, where applicable, in JNDI

Reviewers

Roger Riggs (@RogerRiggs - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 840ea35
Daniel Fuchs (@dfuch - Reviewer)
Aleksei Efimov (@AlekseiEfimov - Committer)
Chris Hegarty (@ChrisHegarty - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 840ea35

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/3416/head:pull/3416
$ git checkout pull/3416

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/3416
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/3416/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 3416

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 3416

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3416.diff

…le, in JNDI

bridgekeeper · 2021-04-09T13:16:25Z

👋 Welcome back ccleary! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

openjdk · 2021-04-09T13:18:13Z

@c-cleary The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

core-libs
security

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

mlbridge · 2021-04-09T13:22:37Z

Webrevs

AlanBateman · 2021-04-09T13:30:27Z

src/java.naming/share/classes/com/sun/jndi/ldap/LdapPoolManager.java

-            }
-        });
+                (PrivilegedAction<String>) () -> System.getProperty(propName, defVal)
+        );


If you want to avoid the cast then you could create the PrivilegedAction explicitly, e.g.

PrivilegedAction pa = () -> System.getProperty(propName, defVal);
return AccessController.doPrivileged(pa);

An alternative here would be to use sun.security.action.privilegedGetProperty(prop, default).
The package is already exported from java.base to java.desktop, etc.

That is a very neat alternative yes. Approaching the problem like that especially improves the readability JdkLDAP.java in my opinion.
I don't think casting has any major performance hits for these fixes, so is your suggestion mostly for readability's sake?

Right, not a performance problem. Just simpler to use an existing method to read a privileged property.
And there will be one less doPriv.

I think I may change the PR to reflect what Alan suggested. Its more readable than the lambda-with-cast solution in that an action is created and then an action is carried out as supposed to fitting it all into one call. Its also as concise.

RogerRiggs

Looks good.

A general reminder about one important difference between an anonymous inner class and a lambda.
An anonymous has identity but a lambda does not; or only accidentally.
None of the uses here require identity.

RogerRiggs · 2021-04-09T13:45:03Z

src/java.naming/share/classes/com/sun/jndi/ldap/LdapPoolManager.java

-            }
-        });
+                (PrivilegedAction<String>) () -> System.getProperty(propName, defVal)
+        );


An alternative here would be to use sun.security.action.privilegedGetProperty(prop, default).
The package is already exported from java.base to java.desktop, etc.

RogerRiggs · 2021-04-09T13:46:46Z

src/java.naming/share/classes/com/sun/jndi/ldap/LdapPoolManager.java

+    private static final long getLong(final String propName, final long defVal) {
+        return AccessController.doPrivileged(
+                (PrivilegedAction<Long>) () -> Long.getLong(propName, defVal).longValue()
+        );


And GetIntegerAction here. Though it only supports an int value.

Thanks for the suggestion Roger, I think the privilegedGetProperty(prop, default) for the getProperty() method looks great.

WRT to using it for getInt() and getLong(), I think its reasonable to use other means for these methods in the interest of consistency due to, as you pointed out, only int being supported. Would you think? Or would it be better to use the same means in all 3 methods?

Its a slippery slope that might require a bit more investigation to check the expected value sizes to see if a change to the number of bits in the value for each property might break something. Technical debt can take you down a rabbit hole. Quickest to just convert to the lamba as you proposed.

I have stuck with the lambda conversion solution in the current changes, however WRT to Alan's previous feedback on creating a PrivilegedAction explicitly as it makes everything a bit more readable.

dfuch · 2021-04-12T16:12:17Z

src/java.naming/share/classes/com/sun/jndi/ldap/LdapPoolManager.java

-            new PrivilegedAction<String>() {
-            public String run() {
-                try {
-                    return System.getProperty(propName, defVal);
-                } catch (SecurityException e) {
-                    return defVal;
-                }
-            }
-        });
+    private static final String getProperty(final String propName, final String defVal) {
+        PrivilegedAction<String> pa = () -> System.getProperty(propName, defVal);
+        return AccessController.doPrivileged(pa);


Hmmm... This is not strictly equivalent but will work because java.naming is loaded by the boot loader and has the permission to read all system properties. I guess the code on the left-hand side was written at a time where JNDI was still in a stand-alone library?

@dfuch I noticed the same about the swallowed exception that returns the default value. This wouldn't cause any regression?

As I noted - the SecurityException should never occur so I don't expect this could cause a regression.

dfuch

LGTM

openjdk · 2021-04-12T16:14:08Z

@c-cleary This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8048199: Replace anonymous inner classes with lambdas, where applicable, in JNDI

Reviewed-by: rriggs, dfuchs, aefimov, chegar

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 41 new commits pushed to the master branch:

7006070: 8265061: Simplify MethodHandleNatives::canBeCalledVirtual
1935655: 8264957: Cleanup unused array Type::dual_type
954b9a1: 8264795: IGV: Upgrade NetBeans platform
f2f7aa3: 8262291: Refactor reserve_memory_special_huge_tlbfs
008fc75: 8264224: Add macosx-aarch64 to Oracle build configurations
f4e6395: 8264190: Harden TLS interop tests
18bec9c: 8265084: [BACKOUT] 8264954: unified handling for VectorMask object re-materialization during de-optimization
9dd9625: 8263763: Synthetic constructor parameters of enum are not considered for annotation indices
1ee80e0: 8261355: No data buffering in SunPKCS11 Cipher encryption when the underlying mechanism has no padding
d84a7e5: 8264124: Update MXBean specification and implementation to extend mapping of CompositeType to records
... and 31 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/f7a6c63ad30a67b34868118a4a88ed100e8bd769...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@RogerRiggs, @dfuch, @AlekseiEfimov, @ChrisHegarty) but any other Committer may sponsor as well.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

AlekseiEfimov

The change looks good to me with one small suggestion:

AlekseiEfimov · 2021-04-12T16:44:16Z

src/java.naming/share/classes/javax/naming/ldap/StartTlsRequest.java

-                }
-            }
-        );
+        PrivilegedAction<ClassLoader> pa = () -> Thread.currentThread().getContextClassLoader();


We can use here an instance method reference to beautify code a little bit more:
PrivilegedAction<ClassLoader> pa = Thread.currentThread()::getContextClassLoader;

Good idea, also would fit in with the style of the method just after, priviligedHasNext() as that also uses a functional interface.

Changes included as described in commit 5d6ecd3

Here again this is not strictly equivalent but AFAIK Thread::currentThread doesn't require any permission, so this should be OK.

c-cleary · 2021-04-13T10:43:59Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2021-04-13T10:45:19Z

@c-cleary
Your change (at version 5d6ecd3) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

AlekseiEfimov · 2021-04-15T14:07:11Z

/sponsor

openjdk · 2021-04-15T14:08:48Z

@AlekseiEfimov @c-cleary Since your change was applied there have been 92 commits pushed to the master branch:

6293299: 8264824: java/net/Inet6Address/B6206527.java doesn't close ServerSocket properly
6b90715: 8265278: doc build fails after JDK-8262981
0fee6ec: 8264318: Lanai: DrawHugeImageTest.java fails on apple M1
81877f7: 8262501: jdk17 libjvm link failure with --as-needed and clock_gettime in librt
b23dbdb: 8257804: Test runtime/modules/ModuleStress/ModuleStressGC.java fails: 'package test defined in module jdk.test, exports list being walked' missing from stdout/stderr
9d669c9: 8262981: Create implementation for NSAccessibilitySlider protocol
abdff79: 8163086: java/awt/Window/TranslucentJAppletTest/TranslucentJAppletTest.java fails
b72d99e: 8233564: [TESTBUG] MouseComboBoxTest.java is failing
2b5869a: 8233565: [TESTBUG] NullModalityDialogTest.java fails on MacOS
bba16f6: 8264818: G1: Improve liveness check for empty pinned regions after full gc marking
... and 82 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/f7a6c63ad30a67b34868118a4a88ed100e8bd769...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit 4e90d74.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

8048199: Replace anonymous inner classes with lambdas, where applicab…

f0c2238

…le, in JNDI

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Apr 9, 2021

openjdk bot added security security-dev@openjdk.org core-libs core-libs-dev@openjdk.org labels Apr 9, 2021

AlanBateman reviewed Apr 9, 2021

View reviewed changes

RogerRiggs reviewed Apr 9, 2021

View reviewed changes

c-cleary added 2 commits April 12, 2021 14:59

Tidied up lambdas

1746840

Update copyright headers

840ea35

dfuch reviewed Apr 12, 2021

View reviewed changes

dfuch approved these changes Apr 12, 2021

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Apr 12, 2021

AlekseiEfimov approved these changes Apr 12, 2021

View reviewed changes

RogerRiggs approved these changes Apr 12, 2021

View reviewed changes

ChrisHegarty approved these changes Apr 12, 2021

View reviewed changes

8048199: Cleaner syntak in getContextClassLoader

5d6ecd3

AlekseiEfimov approved these changes Apr 13, 2021

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Apr 13, 2021

dfuch approved these changes Apr 13, 2021

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot closed this Apr 15, 2021

openjdk bot added integrated Pull request has been integrated and removed sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Apr 15, 2021

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

8048199: Replace anonymous inner classes with lambdas, where applicable, in JNDI #3416

8048199: Replace anonymous inner classes with lambdas, where applicable, in JNDI #3416

c-cleary commented Apr 9, 2021 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

bridgekeeper bot commented Apr 9, 2021

openjdk bot commented Apr 9, 2021

mlbridge bot commented Apr 9, 2021 •

edited

Loading

AlanBateman Apr 9, 2021

RogerRiggs Apr 9, 2021

c-cleary Apr 9, 2021

RogerRiggs Apr 9, 2021

c-cleary Apr 9, 2021

RogerRiggs left a comment

RogerRiggs Apr 9, 2021

RogerRiggs Apr 9, 2021

c-cleary Apr 9, 2021 •

edited

Loading

RogerRiggs Apr 9, 2021

c-cleary Apr 12, 2021

dfuch Apr 12, 2021

YassinHajaj Apr 25, 2021

dfuch Apr 26, 2021

dfuch left a comment

openjdk bot commented Apr 12, 2021 •

edited

Loading

AlekseiEfimov left a comment

AlekseiEfimov Apr 12, 2021

c-cleary Apr 13, 2021

c-cleary Apr 13, 2021

dfuch Apr 13, 2021

c-cleary commented Apr 13, 2021

openjdk bot commented Apr 13, 2021

AlekseiEfimov commented Apr 15, 2021

openjdk bot commented Apr 15, 2021

8048199: Replace anonymous inner classes with lambdas, where applicable, in JNDI #3416

8048199: Replace anonymous inner classes with lambdas, where applicable, in JNDI #3416

Conversation

c-cleary commented Apr 9, 2021 • edited by openjdk bot Loading

Description

Issue

Fixes

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

bridgekeeper bot commented Apr 9, 2021

openjdk bot commented Apr 9, 2021

mlbridge bot commented Apr 9, 2021 • edited Loading

Webrevs

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RogerRiggs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

c-cleary Apr 9, 2021 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dfuch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openjdk bot commented Apr 12, 2021 • edited Loading

AlekseiEfimov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

c-cleary commented Apr 13, 2021

openjdk bot commented Apr 13, 2021

AlekseiEfimov commented Apr 15, 2021

openjdk bot commented Apr 15, 2021

c-cleary commented Apr 9, 2021 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Apr 9, 2021 •

edited

Loading

c-cleary Apr 9, 2021 •

edited

Loading

openjdk bot commented Apr 12, 2021 •

edited

Loading