RFR XXS 8133537: clarify position of unlock options in error messages

[David Holmes]

Hi Dan,

As much as it pains me to do this to you do we really need two lines 
instead of just changing eg:

must be enabled via -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions

to

must be enabled by preceding it with -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions

?

Thanks,
David

On 15/08/2015 6:53 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I have a very small code review request to clarify the wording used
> when the following options are specified in the wrong place:
>
>      -XX:+UnlockDiagnosticVMOptions
>      -XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions
>
> Even though this is a trivial change on the surface, we will not be
> following the HotSpot Trivial Change Rules. This means I need two
> reviewers and one must be a (R)eviewer.
>
> See the bug link for examples of the new output.
>
> 8133537: clarify position of unlock options in error messages
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8133537
>
> Webrev URL: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dcubed/8133537-webrev/0-jdk9-hs-rt/
>
> Testing: JPRT -testset hotspot is in process
>           Aurora Adhoc Runtime-SVC Nightly testing (will be submitted next)
>           (sanity check to make sure new error message line
>            does not break any tests)
>
> Thanks, in advance, for any comments, questions or suggestions.
>
> Dan