code review request for 6880112, Coin: use diamond in core libraries

[Alan Bateman]

Stuart Marks wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As Joe Darcy mentioned yesterday [1], I'm working on updating the JDK 
> libraries to use the new JDK 7 Coin features. The first feature is the 
> diamond operator [2]. This first round of changes includes java.lang, 
> java.io, java.sql, java.util, their corresponding tests, and related 
> implementation files (exclusive of java.util.concurrent and related 
> files). This change touches a total of 71 files. This is rather a lot 
> of files, but the changes are all one-liners, and most files have only 
> a few changes.
>
> Lance, please review the change to 
> src/share/classes/java/sql/DriverManager.java.
>
> Joe, Alan, please review the rest of the changes.
>
> For the curious, I'm using a Jackpot-based automated converter to make 
> bulk changes to large numbers of source files. I plan to do diamond 
> conversion of a few other groups of JDK library packages before moving 
> on to other Coin features.
>
> For verification, it turns out that diamond conversion doesn't change 
> the bytecodes that are emitted by the compiler, so the resulting class 
> files are byte-for-byte identical to class files from before the 
> change. This should make us pretty confident that the changes don't 
> break anything. Unfortunately, other Coin features will change 
> bytecodes, so we won't be able to use this easy verification technique 
> when we apply other Coin features.
>
> The webrev is here:
>
>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/6880112/webrev.0/
Looks good to me, and very easy to review.

One question on this. There are a couple of places where the original 
statement was "too long" to fit on a single line so the RHS of the 
assignment was pushed into a second line. With diamond it means that the 
statement could fit on a single line.  Examples are in 
java.lang.Character at L649 and the changes to java.lang.Package. It's 
purely a style thing but I wonder if the automated converter can do this 
re-formating or whether we just leave it for future maintenance in the 
respective area?

-Alan.