8267578: Remove unnecessary preview checks

[lgxbslgx]

Hi all,

The following preview checks are unnecessary because they are standard features now.

Attr.java

        allowReifiableTypesInInstanceof =
                Feature.REIFIABLE_TYPES_INSTANCEOF.allowedInSource(source) &&
                (!preview.isPreview(Feature.REIFIABLE_TYPES_INSTANCEOF) || preview.isEnabled());

JavacParser.java

        this.allowYieldStatement = (!preview.isPreview(Feature.SWITCH_EXPRESSION) || preview.isEnabled()) &&
                Feature.SWITCH_EXPRESSION.allowedInSource(source);

Resolve.java

        allowYieldStatement = (!preview.isPreview(Feature.SWITCH_EXPRESSION) || preview.isEnabled()) &&
                Feature.SWITCH_EXPRESSION.allowedInSource(source);

It is good to remove them.
Thanks for review.

Best Regards,
-- Guoxiong

---

Progress

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

Issue

• JDK-8267578: Remove unnecessary preview checks

Reviewers

• Jan Lahoda (@lahodaj - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4157/head:pull/4157
$ git checkout pull/4157

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/4157
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4157/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 4157

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 4157

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4157.diff

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back gli! 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]

@lgxbslgx The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

• compiler

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

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (3a6238da)

[JimLaskey]

These checks need to remain to allow the Javac compiler to generate code for earlier releases. Please close.

[JimLaskey]

These checks need to remain to allow the Javac compiler to generate code for earlier releases. Please close.

[mlbridge]

Mailing list message from Jonathan Gibbons on compiler-dev:

Guoxiong,

To be clear, it is an overall requirement that in order to bootstrap-compile the JDK, we must be able to compile javac with the previously available release. Given the short interval between releases, this sometimes evaluates to a numerically 2-earlier release. For example, after we open up the repos for JDK 18 next month, JDK 17 will not be available until September, so we still need to compile javac with JDK 16 until then.

-- Jon

[mlbridge]

Mailing list message from Jonathan Gibbons on compiler-dev:

Guoxiong,

To be clear, it is an overall requirement that in order to bootstrap-compile the JDK, we must be able to compile javac with the previously available release. Given the short interval between releases, this sometimes evaluates to a numerically 2-earlier release. For example, after we open up the repos for JDK 18 next month, JDK 17 will not be available until September, so we still need to compile javac with JDK 16 until then.

-- Jon

[lahodaj]

Looks good to me.

@JimLaskey - please note that javac does not support preview features from previous versions (as per JEP 12). So once a feature is made final, it is safe to remove the preview checks, AFAIK, it just was not done for these few cases.

[openjdk]

@lgxbslgx 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:

8267578: Remove unnecessary preview checks

Reviewed-by: jlahoda

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 1 new commit pushed to the master branch:

• 3113910: 8267553: Extra JavaThread assignment in ClassLoader::create_class_path_entry()

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
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 (@JimLaskey, @lahodaj) 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).

[lgxbslgx]

@JimLaskey @jonathan-gibbons @lahodaj Thanks for your comments and reviews.

This patch only cleans up the preview checks instead of something about releases.

The similar cleanup codes are common when we implement the standard feature. Please see the following two cases.

1. 8260517: implement Sealed Classes as a standard feature in Java

-        this.allowSealedTypes = (!preview.isPreview(Feature.SEALED_CLASSES) || preview.isEnabled()) &&
-                Feature.SEALED_CLASSES.allowedInSource(source);
+        this.allowSealedTypes = Feature.SEALED_CLASSES.allowedInSource(source);

2. 8255013: implement Record Classes as a standard feature in Java, follow-up

-        this.allowRecords = (!preview.isPreview(Feature.RECORDS) || preview.isEnabled()) &&
-                Feature.RECORDS.allowedInSource(source);
+        this.allowRecords = Feature.RECORDS.allowedInSource(source);

We can consider that the codes of this patch were forgotten to cleanup during previous standard features.

[JimLaskey]

Apologies. I misread the nature of the change.

[lgxbslgx]

/integrate

[openjdk]

@lgxbslgx
Your change (at version 3a6238d) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

[lahodaj]

/sponsor

[openjdk]

@lahodaj @lgxbslgx Since your change was applied there have been 3 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 49f622c: 8208747: [a11y] [macos] In Optionpane Demo, inside ComponentDialog Example, unable to navigate to all items, with VO on
• 54520fb: 8267580: The method JavacParser#peekToken is wrong when the first parameter is not zero
• 3113910: 8267553: Extra JavaThread assignment in ClassLoader::create_class_path_entry()

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit f453166.

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