RFR: 8065172: More core reflection final and volatile annotations

[Joel Borggrén-Franck]

Hi Martin,

Looks good. I also think the code is easier to read now.

Thanks for switching back to a version with racy but correct initialization. As Peter wrote, there are many cases where we don’t guarantee == on Type instances. I can see why that would be desirable, but that is a separate discussion (and also "very hard" to accomplish given todays design).

Thanks for taking fixing this.

cheers
/Joel

> On 9 dec 2014, at 17:49, Martin Buchholz <martinrb at google.com> wrote:
> 
> Oops sorry - classic mistake of forgetting to hg qrefresh before publishing.
> 
> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Paul Sandoz <paul.sandoz at oracle.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 8, 2014, at 11:47 PM, Martin Buchholz <martinrb at google.com> wrote:
>>> Webrev updated.
>> 
>> Not quite sure how the webrev was updated:
>> 
>>  http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/core-reflection-more-safety/
>> 
>> But the patch file
>> 
>>  http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/core-reflection-more-safety/core-reflection-more-safety.patch
>> 
>> seems out of sync with the contents for each diff e.g:
>> 
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/core-reflection-more-safety/src/java.base/share/classes/sun/reflect/annotation/AnnotationInvocationHandler.java.sdiff.html
>> 
>> Do you observe the same?
>> 
>> 
>>> Field updaters are gone.  I intend to commit soon.
>>> 
>> 
>> I went through the diffs individually and it seems fine but i don't have 100% confidence that the webrev has not been unintentionally mangled.
>> 
>> Paul.