Code review request, JDK-8010815, some constructors issues in com.sun.jndi.toolkit

David Holmes david.holmes at
Tue May 28 02:17:32 UTC 2013

I'm not familiar with these particular APIs but in general making 
defensive copies of mutable objects is good practice. In this case 
however it is unclear what the impact may be on existing users of this 
code. Eg:


The "environment" is only stored for later use with the 
CannotProceedException, at which time the environment is cloned anyway 
(and cloned again by at least some consumers of that object!). So does 
it matter that we store a reference to the external object? To me that 
is more of a concern for the caller "will somebody mess with this if I 
pass it in?" - they might even be passing you a clone in the first 
place! If someone is passing in an environment that is subsequently 
modified, this change will stop that modification from being seen - 
which might be a good thing and might be a bad thing. There is also the 
memory usage consideration (how big are these environment tables?).

So in terms of the mechanics of making defensive copies this code seems 
fine. But in terms of whether you _should_ be making defensive copies, 
that is a much harder question that I can't answer.


On 28/05/2013 11:31 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> Ping again, any one available to review this changeset?
> Thanks,
> Xuelei
> On 5/13/2013 11:06 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>> On 5/13/2013 10:52 PM, Wang Weijun wrote:
>>> I'll read them tomorrow.
>> OK. It's not a urgent fix.
>>> One question: are all of them designed to be call-by-value instead of shareable?
>> I'm not sure I understand the term "call-by-value" or "shareable". From
>> my understand, they are public classes, and copy-on-write or share-value
>> is the not right solution.  Cloning mutable objects is more robust.
>> Otherwise, we need to check every caller to the method and the thread
>> stacks to make sure it is not abused.  It's nightmare to maintain such code.
>> In the JNDI specification, we normally declare like "This constructor
>> will not modify environment or save a reference to it, but may save a
>> clone. Caller should not modify mutable keys and values in environment
>> after it has been passed to the constructor."
>> Thanks,
>> Xuelei
>>> Thanks
>>> Max
>>> On May 13, 2013, at 10:05 PM, Xuelei Fan < at> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> There is some constructors issues about mutable objects in
>>>> com.sun.jndi.toolkit.
>>>> webrev:
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Xuelei

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list