RFR: 8164669: Lazier initialization of java.time

[Claes Redestad]

Agreed, seems like something to consider for a future release.

Thanks!

/Claes

PS. I still need a OpenJDK Reviewer before I can push this one

On 2016-08-23 23:54, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> Really, we should add a TemporalAmountFormatter to the JDK, but its a
> bigger piece of work and quite tricky.
> Stephen
>
> On 23 August 2016 at 22:52, Claes Redestad <claes.redestad at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2016-08-23 22:52, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>>>
>>> This looks fine to me.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the review!
>>
>>> I suspect that we could hand write a parser to
>>> avoid the regex, but this probably suffices.
>>> Stephen
>>
>>
>> Right, this is admittedly a bit of a hack. Maybe it would be possible
>> to carefully use/extend DateTimeFormatter to deal with Durations and
>> Periods?
>>
>> /Claes
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 23 August 2016 at 19:49, Claes Redestad <claes.redestad at oracle.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> this tiny cleanup reduces number of loaded classes from a minimal test
>>>> touching java.time.ZoneId.systemDefault() by ~40, by virtue of avoiding
>>>> pulling in regex and some internal Calendar-related classes.
>>>>
>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8164669
>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8164669/webrev.01/
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> /Claes