Adding new IBM extended charsets

Alan Bateman Alan.Bateman at
Sun Jul 8 19:55:18 UTC 2018

On 06/07/2018 14:56, Nasser Ebrahim wrote:
> :
> I understood you preferred option is 3 [Remove all extended charsets from
> JDK (keep only default charsets) and use the extended charsets from third
> party like ICU4J]. Just to confirm, so you meant we need to keep only the
> standard charsets in the JDK and remove all the extended charsets from JDK
> and use them from ICU4J OR you meant apply that only for the new extended
> charsets. I think it is better to keep the consistency - either take all
> extended charsets from ICU4J or maintain all extended charsets with JDK.
> Keeping some extended charsets within JDK and use ICU4J for other extended
> charsets may confuse the Java user.
I think the suggestion in Sherman's mail is to drop the 70 or so IBM 
charsets from jdk.charsets. This will reduce the size of jdk.charsets 
and eliminate the need to maintain these charsets (at least on non-AIX 
builds). If developers need these charsets, say when connecting to 
database on an IBM system, then they can deploy the ICU4J provider on 
the class path or module path.

I don't think the suggestion impacts the 11 IBM charsets in java.base on 
non-AIX builds or the non-IBM charsets in jdk.charsets. They may be 
opportunities to drop some of these but that can be looked at separately.

Also I don't think the suggestion impacts the additional 12 IBM charsets 
that are included in the AIX build of java.base at this time. From the 
review threads, it seems there are supported locales on AIX that map to 
these charsets so this is why they are in java.base.


More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list