RFR(M): 8034171: Remove use of template template parameters from binaryTreeDictionary.

[Lindenmaier, Goetz]

Hi Mikael, 

thanks a lot!  
The bug system does not accept '9', so I guess I'll leave it open for now.

Best regards,
  Goetz.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mikael Gerdin [mailto:mikael.gerdin at oracle.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 1:06 PM
To: Lindenmaier, Goetz
Cc: 'hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net'; 'hotspot-runtime-dev at openjdk.java.net'; Baesken, Matthias
Subject: Re: RFR(M): 8034171: Remove use of template template parameters from binaryTreeDictionary.

Hi Goetz,

On Tuesday 11 February 2014 09.02.36 Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The template template parameters in the binaryTreeDictionary are not
> needed to express its functionality. This change replaces them by simple
> class templates and explicit instantiation. This simplifies consumption of
> the openJDK in scenarios requiring older C++ compilers.
> 
> This change also removes dead get_chunk() from binaryTreeDictionary.cpp.
> 
> Bug:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8034171
> webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/webrevs/8034171-1-templ/
> 
> Please review and test this change.  Unfortunately I don't have access
> to JPRT, so I need a sponsor.
> 

I've looked through the changes and they look good.
I've also ran them through JPRT to verify that it compiles and runs on all 
Oracle platforms with our default compiler versions.

I can sponsor this change once it's reviewed.

> 
> I compiled this change on linuxx86_64 with gcc 4.3.4 and 4.8, and on sparcv9
> with SS12u1,
> 
> on windows amd64 and on sparc. I tested dbg, fdbg and opt builds. The change
> ran with all our tests
> 
> on the ppc port, including jbb2013, jvm2008 and parts of a well-known,
> publicly
> 
> not available test suite without problems.
> 
> 
> 
> I would like to downport this change to jdk8u targeting u20 later on.
> 

I don't think that would be a problem.

> 
> 
> Could you please also check whether I filed the bug correctly?  What should
> 
> I put into "affected versions"?

I'd just put "9" there.

/Mikael

> 
> 
> 
> Thanks and best regards,
> 
>   Goetz.