RFR 9: 8132883 : The spec of allChildren/children of j.l.Process/ProcessHandle need to be relaxed
chris.hegarty at oracle.com
Thu Sep 10 14:34:57 UTC 2015
These spec clarifications look ok to me.
Being pedantic, should the ProcessHandle changes say 'the process’, rather than 'this process’?
On 10 Sep 2015, at 15:17, Roger Riggs <Roger.Riggs at oracle.com> wrote:
> Please review a couple of clarifications to the Process/ProcessHandle.allChildren methods.
> 8132883: Should not specify that non-alive processes have zero children.
> That is OS specific and cannot/should not be guaranteed by the spec
> 1. Requests a definition of 'direct' and 'indirect' children - direct children have the process as the parent
> 2. Requests that the streams be specified as either sequential or parallel - the streams are sequential
> Thanks, Roger
More information about the core-libs-dev