RFR(XS): 8204563: UseAppCDS obsolete message confusing
david.holmes at oracle.com
Mon Jun 11 21:38:26 UTC 2018
On 12/06/2018 2:17 AM, Calvin Cheung wrote:
> Hi David,
> Thanks for your review.
> On 6/10/18, 6:14 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>> On 9/06/2018 4:50 AM, Calvin Cheung wrote:
>>> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8204563
>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ccheung/8204563/webrev.00/
>>> This change is for clarifying the obsolete message for the UseAppCDS
>> Nit: not withstanding the edits made to the bug report the correct way
>> to refer to this is as the "obsoletion message".
> I didn't change the synopsis of the bug but the word "obsoletion"
> couldn't be found in dictionary.com.
Obsoletion is pefectly correct:
> Maybe it's more correct to say something like "the message for
> obsoleting the UseAppCDS option is confusing" ?
Rephrasing that way is also correct.
>>> Ignoring option UseAppCDS; support was removed in 11.0
>>> Ignoring obsolete option UseAppCDS; AppCDS is automatically enabled
>>> Ran hs-tier1 and hs-tier2 testing successfully.
>> I'd normally object to special-casing this way but as this will only
>> need to be present for 4 weeks or so it's okay. In the future we may
>> need a way to customize messages in a more generic way.
> Agreed. BTW, the process_argument() is for handling the -XX:xxxx
> options. The obsolete -Xprof is being handled in a separate block of
> code in arguments.cpp.
Yes we only deal with -XX deprecation/obsoletion/expiration. Any -X flag
that isn't handled by the launcher has to be handled as a special case.
>> Looks good.
More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev