-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6k
8273484: Cleanup unnecessary null comparison before instanceof check in java.naming #5374
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
👋 Welcome back turbanoff! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
@turbanoff The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:
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. |
Webrevs
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi Andrey,
The changes look good to me.
And it looks like there is one more method to cleanup: LdapReferralContext.setHopCount
Good catch! Improved. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The latest version looks good to me.
Our CI system is also happy with this patch - no java.naming
test failures observed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice simplification and usage of the new instanceof pattern. Thanks Andrey for this patch!
LGTM - Aleksei or I will sponsor this if needed.
@turbanoff 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:
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 92 new commits pushed to the
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 (@AlekseiEfimov, @dfuch) but any other Committer may sponsor as well. ➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type |
/integrate |
@turbanoff |
/sponsor |
Going to push as commit 2ee1f96.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
@AlekseiEfimov @turbanoff Pushed as commit 2ee1f96. 💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored. |
Update code checks both non-null and instance of a class in java.naming module classes.
The checks and explicit casts could also be replaced with pattern matching for the instanceof operator.
For example:
The following code:
Can be simplified to:
See similar cleanup in java.base - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8258422
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/5374/head:pull/5374
$ git checkout pull/5374
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/5374
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/5374/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 5374
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 5374
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/5374.diff