(XS) RFR: 8077674: BSD build failures due to undefined macros

[harold seigel]

Hi David,

The changes look good.

Thanks, Harold

On 4/20/2015 3:36 AM, David Holmes wrote:
> Thanks Dmitry.
>
> Just realized I still need a (R)eviewer from runtime please. <sigh>
>
> David
>
> On 20/04/2015 5:01 PM, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
>> David,
>>
>> Looks good for me.
>>
>> -Dmitry
>>
>> On 2015-04-20 04:32, David Holmes wrote:
>>> Hi Dmitry,
>>>
>>> Can we get closure on this. Are you okay with:
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8077674/webrev.v2/
>>>
>>> If not please advise exactly how you think this should be fixed.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>>
>>> On 16/04/2015 5:32 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>> On 16/04/2015 5:00 PM, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
>>>>> David,
>>>>>
>>>>>> True but "normal" programming style for mutually exclusive
>>>>>> conditions is to use if/else style logic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Agree in general, but I vote for better readability/error resistance
>>>>> here.
>>>>
>>>> It might be more readable in the sense it is minimalist, but IMHO 
>>>> it is
>>>> less understandable to treat mutually exclusive conditions as if they
>>>> were not mutually exclusive. I don't see the error resistance 
>>>> argument ??
>>>>
>>>>> Also, you may consider to add "sanity" block to the top of file to
>>>>> defend to incorrect defines (multiple variants, VAR = 0 etc)
>>>>
>>>> Not sure what you mean but this seems to be exploding beyond the 
>>>> simple
>>>> build fix I was trying to quickly get out.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>> -Dmitry
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2015-04-16 09:47, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>> On 16/04/2015 4:43 PM, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
>>>>>>> David,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As __FreeBSD__ and __OpenBSD__ etc is unlikely defined together
>>>>>>> you don't need #else here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> True but "normal" programming style for mutually exclusive
>>>>>> conditions is
>>>>>> to use if/else style logic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's a third option I suppose, but I find it less appealing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i.e.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #ifdef __FreeBSD__
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #ifdef __OpenBSD__
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Dmitry
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2015-04-16 08:25, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Here's an alternate webrev based on Kim's findings in the other
>>>>>>>> thread.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8077674/webrev.v2/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Basically #elif XXX is replaced with #else #ifdef XXX #endif". 
>>>>>>>> With
>>>>>>>> lots
>>>>>>>> of new lines of course.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't know what the normal style rules are for nesting
>>>>>>>> preprocessing
>>>>>>>> conditionals. I prefer to see the # lines indented, but I know 
>>>>>>>> people
>>>>>>>> like to see the real code at the indent it would be if there 
>>>>>>>> were no
>>>>>>>> conditional.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As I wrote here:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2015-April/014801.html 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It seems to me there are two choices here:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> a) Use the [original] change proposed but verify that the 
>>>>>>>> variables
>>>>>>>> concerned are ones that if defined will never be defined to be 
>>>>>>>> zero
>>>>>>>> (which I believe to be the case but may have trouble proving :( )
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> b) Replace the 'elif XXX' with 'else ifdef XXX' [v2]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For the few cases involved here (b) seems the easier path.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Comments/suggestions welcomed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 16/04/2015 11:50 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Still need Review for this please (with plans to backport to 8u).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 15/04/2015 6:25 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dmitry,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 14/04/2015 9:25 PM, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> David,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's better to change
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> #ifdef __APPLE__
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> #if defined(__APPLE__)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why? They seem 100% equivalent. Plus that would mean a lot of
>>>>>>>>>> changes.
>>>>>>>>>> Plus we use that pattern in many, many, many places.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -Dmitry
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2015-04-14 13:20, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> webrev:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8077674/webrev/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     From the original error report:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "-Wundef option causes GCC to warn whenever it encounters an
>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifier
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which is not a macro in an ‘#if’. "
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hence we should be using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> #elif defined(__FreeBSD__)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> etc in this context.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I also founds similar suspect usages in os_linux.cpp and
>>>>>>>>>>>> os_windows.cpp.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>