RFR 9: 8077350 Process API Updates Implementation Review

[Alan Bateman]

On 13/05/2015 15:16, Roger Riggs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Are there any comments about the use of java.util.Optional in the 
> ProcessHandle API?
> Or a review of the changes?
Having parent return Optional<ProcessHandle> looks good.

Having all methods in ProcessHandle.Info return Optional is probably 
right, it gives us a bit more flexibility compared to info() returning 
Optional<Info>.

I'm not sure abut the destory* methods, the result of a destroy is 
essentially a boolean so this feels a little odd.

-Alan.