8035782 : sun/launcher/LauncherHelper$FXHelper loaded unnecessarily

[Neil Toda]

1) Redundant return removed.

2) Kumar and I talked: Ever since the pentium bug, 1 in 80 trillion 
seems a big risk .. so the code was changed to
     check for equality with the whole class name:

     private static final String JAVAFX_FXHELPER_CLASS_NAME_SUFFIX =
             "sun.launcher.LauncherHelper$FXHelper";
    ...

         if 
(JAVAFX_FXHELPER_CLASS_NAME_SUFFIX.equals(mainClass.getName()) ||
             doesExtendFXApplication(mainClass)) {
             // Will abort() if there are problems with FX runtime
             FXHelper.setFXLaunchParameters(what, mode);
             return FXHelper.class;
         }


Thanks

-neil

On 5/1/2014 8:05 AM, David DeHaven wrote:
> Do we care about the 1 in more than 80 trillion case where the third party Main-Class would be named "LauncherHelper$FXHelper"? I think the probability is extremely unlikely so I'm fine with it the way it's written.
>
>
> LauncherHelper.java:
> 590         return;
>
> Redundant return statement?
>
> -DrD-
>
>
>> For completeness the bugid line needs the bugid as shown, otherwise SQE will open
>> another bug to have you fix this.
>>
>> -26  * @bug 8001533 8004547
>> +26  * @bug 8001533 8004547 8035782
>>
>> other than that it looks good, I can push this with the above change.
>>
>> Anyone else have any concerns with this change before I push ?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Kumar
>>
>>
>> On 4/30/2014 1:47 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
>>> Please review Launcher change and test.
>>>
>>> I've added to the Launcher test : FXLauncherTest.java
>>> The test will now check that LauncherHelper$FXHelper is not loaded for non-JavaFX class and jar files.
>>>
>>> webrev.02 contains only review suggestions from webrev.01 and the new test class.
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8035782/webrev.02/
>>>
>>> for bug:
>>>
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035782
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> -neil
>>>
>>>