RFR: JDK-8151604: Rely on options range checking rather than explict checks (original) (raw)
Derek White derek.white at oracle.com
Thu Mar 10 16:03:41 UTC 2016
- Previous message (by thread): RFR: JDK-8151604: Rely on options range checking rather than explict checks
- Next message (by thread): RFR: JDK-8151604: Rely on options range checking rather than explict checks
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 3/10/16 4:59 AM, Bengt Rutisson wrote:
Hi everyone, Could I have a couple of reviews for this change? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~brutisso/8151604/webrev.00/ https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151604 With the new range checking in the argument parsing we don't need to have explicit checks in the code to handle invalid arguments. Thanks, Bengt
Great idea. Only comment is that this can go further (I only checked g1CollectorPolicy):
g1CollectorPolicy.cpp:
- Line 186, can change tests of MaxGCPauseMillis to guarantee(), because: range(1, max_uintx)
- Line 192, can change tests of GCPauseIntervalMillis to guarantee(), because: OK, this doesn't have a range defined, but it should:
range(1, max_uintx)
The checks from lines 220-228 are probably covered by the constraint functions (MaxGCPauseMillisConstraintFunc(), etc), but this RFE is about ranges :-)
Line 293, can change tests of SurvivorRatio to guarantee(), because: range(1, max_uintx-2)
Derek -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/attachments/20160310/b45556a6/attachment.htm>
- Previous message (by thread): RFR: JDK-8151604: Rely on options range checking rather than explict checks
- Next message (by thread): RFR: JDK-8151604: Rely on options range checking rather than explict checks
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]