RFR(s): 4285505: deprecate java.lang.Compiler

Krystal Mok rednaxelafx at gmail.com
Wed Sep 7 22:45:39 UTC 2016

Hi Stuart,

I see that on the JBS page, your most recent comment says it's been decided
that for JDK9 it's okay to deprecate and forRemoval=true, while also
mentioning the uses of this class in IBM's implementation.

Does that mean IBM has agreed on the deprecation of this class? I thought
J9 had features that allowed Java applications to do fine-grained control
over the JIT compiler at runtime, e.g. force compilation of specified
methods *at some certain point* in the program.
What JEP 165 is proposing can only statically configure JIT behaviors for
HotSpot. The same approach doesn't seem to cover what J9 used to support.

Could you please share more background on the discussions that led to the


On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Stuart Marks <stuart.marks at oracle.com>

> Tomorrow's headline: Oracle Proposes To Remove Java JIT Compiler
> :-)
> On 9/7/16 2:44 PM, Remi Forax wrote:
>> Yes, i like this patch :)
>> Aleksey, It's worst than what you think because for a lot of people
>> Compiler == java compiler and not JIT compiler so they try to compile a
>> .java file with the method compileClasses(String).
>> I'm glad this class will disappear soon.
>> Rémi
>> ----- Mail original -----
>>> De: "Aleksey Shipilev" <ashipile at redhat.com>
>>> À: "Stuart Marks" <stuart.marks at oracle.com>, "core-libs-dev" <
>>> core-libs-dev at openjdk.java.net>
>>> Envoyé: Mercredi 7 Septembre 2016 23:34:02
>>> Objet: Re: RFR(s): 4285505: deprecate java.lang.Compiler
>> On 09/07/2016 11:52 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
>>>> Please review this small patch to deprecate java.lang.Compiler for
>>>> removal.
>>> Yes, +1.
>>> This class is very confusing to have these days.
>>> -Aleksey

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list