RFR; 8077420: Build failure with SS12u4

[Stefan Karlsson]

Hi David,

On 2015-04-13 14:25, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> On 13/04/2015 9:57 PM, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please review this fix for a build failure that was encountered during
>> the Solaris Studio compiler upgrade.
>
> So what was it about the compiler upgrade that exposed this ??

I'm not sure, but somehow the function wasn't made available to the 
compiler/linker. Maybe there's a combination of the inline keyword and 
template functions that used to work, but doesn't anymore? I don't have 
access to a SS12u4 setup, so Erik J had to compile with the patch.

>
>> Two files were missing an include of stack.inline.hpp, which is needed
>> to get the definition of default_segment_size(). This function is used
>> in the stack.hpp, to provide the default value to the constructor. This
>> forces all users of Stacks with the default segment size, to have to
>> include stack.inline.hpp. The default_segment_size() implementation
>> always evaluates to the same value, given the template parameters, so I
>> chose to setup a constant in the header instead of adding the missing
>> stack.inline.hpp files.
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/8077420/webrev.01/
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8077420
>
> This seems okay but I have to say I remain very confused about the 
> "right" way to deal with .hpp and .inline.hpp files in general.

OK. One rule to honor, as far as possible, is to _not_ use functions in 
inline.hpp files from .hpp files. In this case stack.hpp used a function 
in stack.inline.hpp.

Maybe there's a more authoritative place that describes the "right way", 
but I think this post is worth reading and describes it well enough:
http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/articles/10627/

Thanks,
StefanK

>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>> Tested with JPRT, and built with SS12u4.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> StefanK