RFR: 8336654: [lworld] Tests depending on sun.awt.AppContext can fail when run with migrated classes [v5]

[Sergey Bylokhov]

On Tue, 6 Jan 2026 18:13:38 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> src/java.desktop/macosx/classes/com/apple/laf/AquaUtils.java line 155:
>> 
>>> 153:         T instance;
>>> 154: 
>>> 155:         final T get() {
>> 
>> It is used in a few places to cache the fonts/images/etc, so to be a "Recyclable" + "Singleton" it should store/return soft reference, and somehow handle the value types properly.
>
> All uses of this are stored in static final fields and typically it is a singleton or fixed size list/map
> I don't see anything that will grow without bounds, and SoftReference isn't a great way to manage
> such cases anyway.
> 
> So I don't see any problem with doing away with SoftReference.
> If we keep it, I think it is just more overhead.
> 
> And I don't see any way that isn't tricky and messy to do this whilst still allowing value types.
> It might be easier once Valhalla actually lands so we could check if it is an identity type.
> 
> So if we keep the reference then a point fix of the Boolean case seems the practical solution.
> There's no great value to keeping a SoftRef to a Boolean so we can do without it.
> But it meant I had to look for any other similar cases by hand. I didn't find any.
> 
> Doing this means no changes to the existing RecyclableSingleton class are necessary to resolve the specific issue.
> But I think we want to soon enough get rid of AppContext anyway, so I am moving the ref usage
> directly into RecyclableSingleton and keeping the deletion of the method from AppContext.
> The ImageCache doesn't need it. The cached images are managed by the cache code itself.
> 
> The most recent commit implements the above but I don't see a problem with pushing without that commit.

That looks fine. What about LazyConstant? It seems to have similar functionality to the new LazySingleton, aside from the name. Personally, I do not think LazyConstant is a great name....

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22868#discussion_r2666804936