type-annotations based on JDK 9?
alex.buckley at oracle.com
Wed Jan 22 14:06:01 PST 2014
Jon, are you waiting for a patch from Werner?
Werner, are you waiting for Jon to do something?
On 1/16/2014 4:13 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Stuff has to go through 9 first and then backported.
> -- Jon
> On 01/16/2014 12:46 PM, Alex Buckley wrote:
>> Am I right in saying that the changes that Werner identifies as being
>> solely in type-annotations/langtools can be applied to jdk8u/langtools
>> right now?
>> Or are we at the point when they have to go into jdk9/dev/langtools
>> first, then be backported to jdk8u?
>> I don't know your plans, but if you expect to be contributing to javac
>> in the future, then becoming a Committer in JDK 8 Updates or JDK 9
>> would be the right thing to do.
>> On 1/15/2014 12:18 PM, Werner Dietl wrote:
>>> In preparation for moth-balling the type-annotations repositories,
>>> I've just synced type-annotations against jdk9/dev.
>>> All repositories other than "langtools" are equal (except for .hgtags
>>> files and the jdk repo, where I pulled a few additional jdk8 changes
>>> that are not in jdk9 yet). There is not a lot of interesting history
>>> in these repos.
>>> I made type-annotations/langtools as similar to jdk9/dev/langtools as
>>> The last remaining differences, which I think at some point should
>>> move to jdk9/dev, are:
>>> Instantiates an Options object that is not needed.
>>> Contains a checkNonNull call that results in generating a String
>>> for an annotation - potentially expensive.
>>> Improved an exception message.
>>> Fix a typo in a doc-comment.
>>> Clean up imports. Most changes remove unused imports.
>>> Fix whitespace.
>>> These tests work for me. Is there a reason to ignore them?
>>> This is the last test failure assigned to me.
>>> Does the jdk9/dev version of this file compile?
>>> This is a failing test. I extended it with a few more cases.
>>>> Since you were an Author in the JDK 8 Project, you're an Author in
>>>> the JDK 8
>>>> Updates Project and JDK 9 Project. It would probably be useful for
>>>> you to be
>>>> a Committer in one or both of those Projects, but there's a process for
>>>> that, of course.
>>> I am very thankful that Jon took care of these administrative issues
>>> for me.
>>> I'm open to apply for the Committer role, but maybe that's not
>>> necessary for the few remaining patches from me.
>>> Let me know which way you prefer.
>>> cu, WMD.
More information about the type-annotations-dev