RFR (S): 8140424: don't prefix developer and notproduct flag variables with CONST_ in product builds

[Christian Thalinger]

> On Nov 6, 2015, at 1:38 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Christian, 
> 
> thanks for doing this change.  It looks good.
> 
> It's good that now notproduct flags are also defined in the product build as constants, 
> as it's already the case with debug flags.
> This allows more cleanups in the style you did to compilerDirectives.hpp.
> 
> I had a look at these cleanups, quite a row you can find in this patch:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/webrevs/8140424-notProd/not_product_cleanups.patch <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/webrevs/8140424-notProd/not_product_cleanups.patch>

That is a very nice cleanup.

> 
> Does it make sense to commit these along with your change?

It does.  I’ve updated my webrev with your changes:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~twisti/8140424/webrev/

> 
> Best regards,
>  Goetz.
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: hotspot-dev [mailto:hotspot-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On
>> Behalf Of Christian Thalinger
>> Sent: Freitag, 6. November 2015 07:23
>> To: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> Subject: RFR (S): 8140424: don't prefix developer and notproduct flag
>> variables with CONST_ in product builds
>> 
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140424
>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140424>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~twisti/8140424/webrev/
>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~twisti/8140424/webrev/>
>> 
>> When working on JDK-8024545 I added code that prefixes developer and
>> notproduct flags with CONST_. I think I did this to be able to access the
>> address of these variables for the flag table. But this is not necessary because
>> these flag cannot be written anyway.
>> 
>> I am proposing to remove the CONST_ prefix and define the variables as
>> const.