(8034912) Approval request : RFR: (8031737) CHECK_NULL and CHECK_EXCEPTION macros cleanup

[Seán Coffey]

Approved for pushing to jdk8u-dev.

regards,
Sean.

On 14/02/14 01:38, Phil Race wrote:
> Yeah sorry about that. It built on Windows and Mac but not Linux as i 
> found out today.
>
> -phil.
>
> On 2/13/14 5:36 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> Looks good.   Sorry I didn't catch this earlier and I was counting on 
>> the test build :)
>>
>> Mandy
>> [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c58c6b0fbe34
>>
>> On 2/13/2014 1:50 PM, Phil Race wrote:
>>> That worked on Mac but I just found it doesn't build on Linux 
>>> because a macro-redefinition
>>>  warning is treated as an error there.
>>>
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8034912
>>>
>>> The early/original fix had removed the duplicate definition in
>>> src/share/native/java/net/net_util.h
>>>
>>> So the fix is to do the same in 8u :-
>>>
>>> ~/jdk8u-dev/jdk$ hg diff src/share/native/java/net/net_util.h
>>> diff --git a/src/share/native/java/net/net_util.h 
>>> b/src/share/native/java/net/net_util.h
>>> --- a/src/share/native/java/net/net_util.h
>>> +++ b/src/share/native/java/net/net_util.h
>>> @@ -42,9 +42,6 @@
>>>  #define NET_ERROR(env, ex, msg) \
>>>  { if (!(*env)->ExceptionOccurred(env)) JNU_ThrowByName(env, ex, msg) }
>>>
>>> -#define CHECK_NULL(x) if ((x) == NULL) return;
>>> -#define CHECK_NULL_RETURN(x, y) if ((x) == NULL) return y;
>>> -
>>>  /************************************************************************ 
>>>
>>>   * Cached field IDs
>>>   *
>>>
>>> A little surprised no else else found this already  (did they?)
>>> Anyway I need a review and Ok to push 8034912  to JDk 8 u
>>>
>>> -Phil.
>>>
>>> On 02/12/2014 10:21 AM, Mike Duigou wrote:
>>>> This looks fine.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 11 2014, at 15:42 , Phil Race <philip.race at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Here's a JDk8u webrev : -http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8031737.8u/
>>>>>
>>>>> -phil.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/11/14 2:28 PM, Phil Race wrote:
>>>>>> So since hg export/import doesn't apply cleanly and the dependency
>>>>>> chain seems, long and in order to have some consistency across 
>>>>>> the releases,
>>>>>> I think I should prepare a webrev which essentially backports 
>>>>>> 8031737
>>>>>> including its small changes to Version.c, if only because otherwise
>>>>>> I'd have to have a new bug ID that would not be forwarded ported
>>>>>> (one source of confusion) or even worse re-use 8031737 but not 
>>>>>> fully implement it
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Agreed ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -phil.
>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>