Skip to content
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

8276401: Use blessed modifier order in java.net.http #6228

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

dfuch
Copy link
Member

@dfuch dfuch commented Nov 3, 2021

Hi,

Please find here a trivial cleanup change that updates classes in the java.net.http module to use the "blessed modifier order".

The changeset was obtained by running sh ./bin/blessed-modifier-order.sh src/java.net.http.

best regards,

-- daniel


Progress

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

Issue

  • JDK-8276401: Use blessed modifier order in java.net.http

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/6228/head:pull/6228
$ git checkout pull/6228

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/6228
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/6228/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 6228

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 6228

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6228.diff

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Nov 3, 2021

👋 Welcome back dfuchs! 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 openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Nov 3, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 3, 2021

@dfuch The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • net
  • 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.

@openjdk openjdk bot added security security-dev@openjdk.org net net-dev@openjdk.org labels Nov 3, 2021
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Nov 3, 2021

Webrevs

Copy link
Member

@pavelrappo pavelrappo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Don't forget to update the copyright years, if you think that it's necessary.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 3, 2021

@dfuch 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:

8276401: Use blessed modifier order in java.net.http

Reviewed-by: prappo, rriggs

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 8 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • be1ca2b: 8276298: G1: Remove unused G1SegmentedArrayBufferList::add
  • a316c06: 8275730: Relax memory constraint on MultiThreadedRefCounter
  • 6150633: 8276348: Use blessed modifier order in java.base
  • 465d350: 8276157: C2: Compiler stack overflow during escape analysis on Linux x86_32
  • 7439b59: 8276044: ciReplay: C1 does not dump a replay file when using DumpReplay as compile command option
  • 87b926e: 8275086: compiler/c2/irTests/TestPostParseCallDevirtualization.java fails when compiler1 is disabled
  • 2b02b6f: 8274942: AssertionError at jdk.compiler/com.sun.tools.javac.util.Assert.error(Assert.java:155)
  • bb92fb0: 8274930: sun/tools/jps/TestJps.java can fail with long VM arguments string

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.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Nov 3, 2021
@msheppar
Copy link

msheppar commented Nov 3, 2021

a general comment on the static abstract class changes to abstract static class. For me the former and current declarations seems more appropriate, that is, static abstract class, as the static modifier immediately conveys a significant and strong structural relationship with outer or containing class. While abstract has a qualification on class i.e. the type of class and appearing directly before class is more natural (to me !!). As such, abstract qualifies the static relationship.
The placement and ordering of the modifier should be to assist in covering semantics when scanning code, and conveys a certain level of "importance" of the qualifier's semantics

@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Nov 3, 2021

Mailing list message from Daniel Fuchs on net-dev:

Hi Mark,

On 03/11/2021 14:30, Mark Sheppard wrote:

a general comment on the static abstract class changes to abstract static class. For me the former and current declarations seems more appropriate, that is, static abstract class, as the static modifier immediately conveys a significant and strong structural relationship with outer or containing class. While abstract has a qualification on class i.e. the type of class and appearing directly before class is more natural (to me !!). As such, abstract qualifies the static relationship.
The placement and ordering of the modifier should be to assist in covering semantics when scanning code, and conveys a certain level of "importance" of the qualifier's semantics

WRT `static abstract` vs `abstract static` I had exactly the
same feeling - but since there is a blessed ordering and a
script to fix classes to conform to the blessed
ordering I'm not going to fight it.

best regards,

-- daniel

@msheppar
Copy link

msheppar commented Nov 3, 2021

Mailing list message from Daniel Fuchs on net-dev:

Hi Mark,

On 03/11/2021 14:30, Mark Sheppard wrote:

a general comment on the static abstract class changes to abstract static class. For me the former and current declarations seems more appropriate, that is, static abstract class, as the static modifier immediately conveys a significant and strong structural relationship with outer or containing class. While abstract has a qualification on class i.e. the type of class and appearing directly before class is more natural (to me !!). As such, abstract qualifies the static relationship.
The placement and ordering of the modifier should be to assist in covering semantics when scanning code, and conveys a certain level of "importance" of the qualifier's semantics

WRT static abstract vs abstract static I had exactly the same feeling - but since there is a blessed ordering and a script to fix classes to conform to the blessed ordering I'm not going to fight it.

best regards,

-- daniel

:-) cula bula ... that's fair enough, no argument here, just thought it worth a comment.
as with a lot of "style guides", the blessed order can be a little idiosyncratic
a bit like the case of would you wear a stripped tie with a check shirt, or is a plain tie the only suitable option :-)

@dfuch
Copy link
Member Author

dfuch commented Nov 3, 2021

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 3, 2021

Going to push as commit 7115892.
Since your change was applied there have been 12 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 0ef8cbe: 8276385: Re-run blessed-modifier-order script on java.desktop and jdk.accessibility
  • 724bf3b: 8275604: Zero: Reformat opclabels_data
  • 61cb4bc: 8276036: The value of full_count in the message of insufficient codecache is wrong
  • 8731846: 8276556: ProblemList java/nio/channels/FileChannel/LargeGatheringWrite.java on windows-x64
  • be1ca2b: 8276298: G1: Remove unused G1SegmentedArrayBufferList::add
  • a316c06: 8275730: Relax memory constraint on MultiThreadedRefCounter
  • 6150633: 8276348: Use blessed modifier order in java.base
  • 465d350: 8276157: C2: Compiler stack overflow during escape analysis on Linux x86_32
  • 7439b59: 8276044: ciReplay: C1 does not dump a replay file when using DumpReplay as compile command option
  • 87b926e: 8275086: compiler/c2/irTests/TestPostParseCallDevirtualization.java fails when compiler1 is disabled
  • ... and 2 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/6a04899ba1a62f52f7e28cc2ed72bdca115e6562...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Nov 3, 2021
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated Pull request has been integrated and removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Nov 3, 2021
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 3, 2021

@dfuch Pushed as commit 7115892.

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

@dfuch dfuch deleted the net-blessed-mod-order-8276401 branch November 3, 2021 16:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
integrated Pull request has been integrated net net-dev@openjdk.org security security-dev@openjdk.org
4 participants