RFR (XS): 80357290: Code using assert(is_oop_or_null) needs better error messages

[Marcus Larsson]

Hi Thomas,

I like your suggestion and updated the changeset.

New CR:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~brutisso/webrev-8035729v2/

Thanks,
Marcus

On 08/06/2014 11:24 AM, Thomas Schatzl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 2014-08-06 at 10:28 +0200, Marcus Larsson wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can I have reviews for this small change adding oop information to
>> is_oop_or_null assert fail messages?
>>
>> CR:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~brutisso/webrev-8035729/
>>
>> Bug:
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035729/
>    not sure what the other think, but is it worth to try to make the
> error messages themselves be more uniform?
> While I do not want to be all the same, we have:
>
> 1) expected an oop or NULL
> 2) expected an oop or NULL:
> 3) Not an oop? (
> 4) check for header:
> 5) should be an oop now:
> 6) Object should be whole at this point:
> 7) Not an oop:
> 8) discovered field is bad:
> 9) bad referent:
> 10) bad next field:
> 11) bad discovered field:
> 12) should always be an oop:
>
> Some suggestions:
>
> - Capitalize the first letter of the sentences
> - change 1 to "Expected an oop or NULL at "
> - replace 2,3,5,6,7,12 by 1
> - change 4,9-11 to "Expected an oop for <type> field at "
>
> Otherwise the change is good.
>
> Thanks,
>    Thomas
>
>
>