Review Request: 7193406 - Clean-up JDK Build Warnings in java.util, java.io

[Andrew Hughes]

----- Original Message -----
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > Please review the fix of CR 7193406 at
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7193406/webrev/.
> > 
> 
> snip...
> 
> > And it enables fatal warning flag in the following make file.
> > 
> >     make/java/jar/Makefile
> > 
> 
> Please don't do this, at least not unconditionally.
> 
> At the very least, these should not be forced on if the user
> has explicitly built with them set to false.  If I set
> JAVAC_WARNINGS_FATAL=false, I don't expect part of the build
> to ignore this and use -Werror, possibly then causing build
> failures.
> 
> This is especially bad with both on as a new warning may be
> introduced into javac which then breaks everyone's build.
> 
> I already have a patch I intend to upstream which fixes the
> other cases of this I found.  I'd prefer we didn't have another.
> 
> > 
> > In FilePermission.java file, I make one change to its method
> > signature,
> > 
> >     public Enumeration elements()  ==> public
> >     Enumeration<Permission>
> >     elements()
> > 
> > 
> > I am not sure whether it will cause an issue of backward
> > compatibility.
> > Please advise. Thanks!
> > 
> 
> It's in a package-private class so I doubt it.
> 
> Even if it wasn't, a new major release is the perfect time to fix
> these issues.
> 
> > - Dan
> > 
> 

I should also point out that the annotation:

    @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
    private void readObject(ObjectInputStream in) throws IOException,

could be moved down to the actual problematic assignment:

        Vector<Permission> permissions = (Vector<Permission>)gfields.get("permissions", null);

so that warnings aren't suppressed throughout the method.

-- 
Andrew :)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

PGP Key: 248BDC07 (https://keys.indymedia.org/)
Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F  8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07