RFR (S): 8214791: Rename vm_operations_g1* files to g1VMOperations*

[Per Liden]

I think we should do it now. JDK12 is still open and this should be 
pretty risk free IMHO.

/Per

On 2018-12-05 16:34, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
> Gotta ask... Do we want to do this rename now or after the JDK13 fork?
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> On 12/5/18 10:21 AM, coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for asking!
>>
>> On 12/5/18 10:05 AM, Thomas Schatzl wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2018-12-05 at 12:41 +0100, Per Liden wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>> [...]
>>>>>> Coleen and I talked about this, and neither of us wants yet
>>>>>> another naming convention for these files.
>>>>>> See her comment in the bug report for her
>>>>>> preference.  (vmG1Operations).  I don’t care that much
>>>>>> about the specifics, so long as there is consistency (which there
>>>>>> admittedly is not, at present, but
>>>>>> this proposed change just makes that worse).
>>>>>>
>>>>> I could rename the other gc files too to make them consistent, e.g.
>>>>> cmsVMOperations :)
>>>>>
>>>>> However I can be convinced to go with vmG1Operations although it
>>>>> does read backwards imho. At least it gets rid of the underscore.
>>>>>
>>>>> New webrev with that latter change:
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/8214791/webrev.1
>>>> I don't know... I would suggest we have either a prefix or a suffix.
>>>> The "midfix" (is that a word?) style is just strange. For example:
>>>>
>>>>    runtime/vmOperations.hpp
>>>>    gc/shared/gcVMOperations.hpp
>>>>    gc/g1/g1VMOperations.hpp
>>>>    gc/parallel/psVMOperations.hpp
>>>>    gc/cms/cmsVMOperations.hpp
>>> I would prefer this (this is actually the original suggestion) and will
>>> do the work if everyone agrees on that. Widening to hotspot-runtime-dev
>>> in the hope that we can catch all that discussion there too then.
>>
>> I'm okay with this convention too (despite what I wrote in the bug), 
>> if they're all changed.  I can guess that name when looking for it.
>>>> or maybe (to follow the vmStructs style):
>>>>
>>>>    runtime/vmOperations.hpp
>>>>    gc/shared/vmOperations_gc.hpp
>>>>    gc/g1/vmOperations_g1.hpp
>>>>    gc/parallel/vmOperations_ps.hpp
>>>>    gc/cms/vmOperations_cms.hpp
>>
>> I don't like underscores.
>>>>
>>>> But then I also don't think there is any real value in always having
>>>> VM_Operation (or other things like OopClosure) classes declared in
>>>> separate files, like we currently do. In some cases such classes
>>>> have very little in common and are better place in the context they
>>>> are used.
>>>> For example, in ZGC the VM_ZOperation class is an internal part of
>>>> the ZDriver, and not declared in a separate file.
>>
>> I like the separate files.  Then I can find them all and try to figure 
>> out what the vm operation flags mean.
>>> I agree, I saw that and think it is nice(r) :) However e.g. the
>>> g1CollectedHeap.cpp file is big enough as it is, and the files are
>>> there already.
>>>
>>> It's just that every time I look at these names in the file browser I
>>> see these very strangely named files and think to myself that this
>>> should be fixed. Now here we are...
>>
>> Me too!  Thank you for fixing these!
>> Coleen
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>    Thomas
>>>
>>>
>>
>