RFR: 8153666: Optimize Formatter.formatMessage

[Daniel Fuchs]

On 08/06/16 15:35, Roger Riggs wrote:
> Yes, I would update the spec to the new behavior.

What about:

      * <li>Otherwise, if the string contains {@code "{<digit>"}
      *     where {@code <digit>} is in {@code [0-9]}
      *     then java.text.MessageFormat  is used to format the string.

-- daniel

>
>
> On 6/8/2016 10:31 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>>
>> Good point Roger!
>>
>> I was already wondering whether looking for {[0-9] instead
>> of {[0-3] deserved a small mention in the release note.
>>
>> The fact that the spec needs updating confirms that this
>> little behavior change probably needs to be mentioned.
>>
>> I will do the paperwork for the spec change.
>> I don't think we need any switch to revert to the old behaviour,
>> right?
>>
>> best regards,
>>
>> -- daniel
>>
>>
>> On 08/06/16 15:14, Roger Riggs wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> Looks ok, but...
>>>
>>> Formatter.java:
>>>
>>> - line 104: the javadoc says it looks for '{0'  but the implementation
>>> looks for '{'[0..9]
>>>   It looks like the spec is out of sync with the implementation (the
>>> implementation is more lenient)
>>>   and has been for a while.
>>>
>>>   According to the spec/javadoc; no formatting should occur unless it
>>> contains "{0"
>>>
>>> Roger
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/8/2016 9:46 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Please find below a patch for a small optimization
>>>> in Formatter.formatMessage.
>>>> This patch also removed the synchronized keyword which
>>>> was there for historical reasons - but which has
>>>> become needless.
>>>>
>>>> More background available at:
>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153666
>>>> (thanks Martin!)
>>>> and
>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/36433146/why-is-the-formatmessage-method-in-java-util-logging-formatter-synchronized
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (thanks Jason!)
>>>>
>>>> bug:
>>>> 8153666: Optimize Formatter.formatMessage
>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153666
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> patch:
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_8153666/webrev.00
>>>>
>>>> best regards, and thanks to all who provided suggestions and
>>>> archeological background!
>>>>
>>>> -- daniel
>>>
>>
>