RFR (JAXP) 8158619: Very large CDATA section in XML document causes OOME

[Joe Wang]

Thanks again, Daniel!

-Joe

On 11/17/16, 12:14 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> Looks good to me Joe.
>
> best regards,
>
> -- daniel
>
> On 17/11/16 19:58, Joe Wang wrote:
>> Thanks Lance, Daniel, and Christoph.  I adopted the changes as 
>> suggested.
>>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~joehw/jdk9/8158619/webrev/
>>
>> The changeset has been in my workspace for over a month now. So it's
>> good to get it out of the way.
>>
>> On raw type, other warnings and obsolete code:
>>       we made the top 3 in terms of the number of warnings. We're trying
>> to correct that as we go with fixing a small set at a time within the
>> scope of the current change. It's not being ideal since often times we
>> have to stop where it affects the signatures (or have to expand to other
>> classes). Eventually, we'd have to bite the bullet and conduct a
>> complete overhaul of the code.  I actually did it in the jaxp standalone
>> repo with regard to the obsolete types, but it was lost in the middle of
>> transition during the jdk7.
>>
>> On format, I agree with Daniel, we can at least fix the very-long lines
>> near the changes, and not to introduce new ones. For other formats, it's
>> tempting to just hit the NetBeans - format function. But then, it'd
>> generate a huge amount of changes that could make it difficult for the
>> reviewers.  One thing we could do is not to include format changes in
>> webrevs, and instead just make a note that NetBeans-format will be done
>> before check-in. But even that might be unnecessary since it would make
>> it hard to trace back changes in the repo.
>>
>> After all is said (about format), we are unfortunately to live with the
>> messy format we inherited, but we shall fix the long lines though.
>>
>> **it's interesting to note that NetBeans-format will remove the line
>> between License header and package name, which is required by the
>> Licencing tool**
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Joe
>>
>> On 11/17/16, 5:43 AM, Lance Andersen wrote:
>>> Hi Joe,
>>>
>>> Overall looks good.
>>>
>>> I agree with Daniel that you might want to reconsider
>>> reworking JdkXmlUtils.getValue to make it a bit more robust incase of
>>> an surprise Object passed for value.
>>>
>>> HTH
>>> Best
>>> Lance
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Nov 16, 2016, at 5:12 PM, Joe Wang <huizhe.wang at oracle.com
>>>> <mailto:huizhe.wang at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Please review an enhancement adding a property to allow for
>>>> specifying the chunk size of CDATA.
>>>>
>>>> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8158619
>>>> webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~joehw/jdk9/8158619/webrev/
>>>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejoehw/jdk9/8158619/webrev/>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>
>>> <http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif>
>>> <http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif><http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif> 
>>>
>>> <http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif>Lance
>>> Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037
>>> Oracle Java Engineering
>>> 1 Network Drive
>>> Burlington, MA 01803
>>> Lance.Andersen at oracle.com <mailto:Lance.Andersen at oracle.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>