RFR: 8086027: Multiple STATIC_ASSERTs at class scope doesn't work (original) (raw)

Kim Barrett kim.barrett at oracle.com
Tue Jun 9 19:10:48 UTC 2015

On Jun 9, 2015, at 4:48 AM, Bengt Rutisson <bengt.rutisson at oracle.com> wrote:

CR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8086027

Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kbarrett/8086027/webrev.00/ This looks good to me. One question about the test in debug.cpp: 792 // class scope 793 struct TestMultipleStaticAssertFormsInClassScope { I know struct and class are pretty much the same, but wouldn't it be more consistent to use class instead of struct here since the comment (and I think the spec) talk about class scope?

The definition of “class scope” makes no distinction for the introducing class-key. The “class” and “struct” class-keys are (so far as I can tell) identical other than their implications for initial accessibility. (Despite some compilers warning about mismatches in class-key usage between forward declarations and definitions.) If I used “class” here rather than “struct” I would probably add “public:” to avoid any possibility of some compiler whining about the unused typedefs. (Although gcc -Wunused-local-typedefs will still hit us in the function scope case; but I don’t think that’s a very interesting warning anyway, though as of gcc4.8 it’s part of -Wall, which annoyed lots of people.)

Either way is fine with me and in any case you don't need to send out another webrev. Thanks, Bengt

Thanks for reviewing.

More information about the hotspot-dev mailing list