RFR 8243572: Multiple tests fail with assert(cld->klasses() != 0LL) failed: unexpected NULL for cld->klasses()
mandy.chung at oracle.com
Tue Apr 28 23:37:31 UTC 2020
OK. I can go with "weak hidden" in JFR description as it's informal.
On 4/28/20 2:59 PM, Markus Gronlund wrote:
> “Hidden” genera (default) “Strong Hidden” species?
Weak is the default.
> If need to make explicit, “Weak Hidden” vs “Strong Hidden”
> “Weak” as a term induces the, historically intuitive, idea of
> not-strong. “Regular” and “Normal” are too general for this concept,
> especially as Hidden Classes are introduced to be an alternative to
> (historically) “Regular” and “Normal” classes.
> 2 cents
> Sent from my iPhone
>> On 28 Apr 2020, at 23:12, Mandy Chung <mandy.chung at oracle.com> wrote:
>> On 4/28/20 1:13 PM, John Rose wrote:
>>> On Apr 28, 2020, at 1:10 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.chung at oracle.com
>>> <mailto:mandy.chung at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>>> "non-strong" is the best term I can come up with.
>>> If strong is the non-default choice, then any of “regular”,
>>> “normal”, or “weak” would be OK in my book. I know
>>> “weak” is no longer a technical term, but as an informal
>>> opposite to “strong” it would work, now.
>> "regular" or "normal" is a good one. I didn't suggest that because
>> we use "normal class" to refer to non-hidden class. For this
>> specific discussion about JFR user-visible description,
>> "regular/normal hidden classes" is probably better.
>>> (This is a big sign of progress: There’s little remaining to
>>> discuss except bike shed colors!)
More information about the hotspot-runtime-dev