RFR 9: 8077350 Process API Updates Implementation Review

[Roger Riggs]

Hi Paul,

That's a good point, the subprocess terminology is in the prior descriptions
so wasn't included in the scope of the updates.  But in my reading, 
replacing
subprocess by process would not change the semantics or understanding
since the spawned process is always the direct object.  Perhaps worth an
editorial update as a separate issue.

Thanks, Roger


On 4/9/2015 6:19 PM, Paul Benedict wrote:
> My only comment is the method summary sentences of Process sometime 
> refer to itself as "process" and other times "subprocess". I'm 
> guessing they both refer to the same so perhaps the language shouldn't 
> equivocate.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Roger Riggs <Roger.Riggs at oracle.com 
> <mailto:Roger.Riggs at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>     Please review the API and implementation of the Process API Updates
>     described inJEP 102
>     <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046092>. Please  review
>     and comment by April 23rd.
>
>     The recommendation to make ProcessHandle an interface is included
>     allowing the new functions to be extended by Process subclasses.
>     The implementation covers all functions on Unix, Windows, Solaris,
>     and Mac OS X.
>
>     The API doc: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/ph-apidraft/
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erriggs/ph-apidraft/>
>
>     The webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-ph
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erriggs/webrev-ph>
>
>     Issue: JDK-8077350
>     <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8077350> Process API
>     Updates Implementation
>
>     The code is in the jdk9 sandbox on branch JDK-8046092-branch.
>
>     Please review and comment, Roger
>
>