RFR: 8268821: Split systemDictionaryShared.cpp

[David Holmes]

On 24/06/2021 2:23 am, Yumin Qi wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 06:08:41 GMT, Yumin Qi <minqi at openjdk.org> wrote:
> 
>> Hi, Please review
>> systemDictionaryShared becomes fatter and fatter so it is time to split it into functional files. Moved security and jar operation related code into CDSProtectionDomain, and moved shared class info (DumpTime/RunTime) to sharedClassInfo.[ch]pp, also moved lambda proxy related to lambdaProxyClassInfo.hpp. This way systemDictionaryShared.cpp looks neat and light.
>>
>> Tests: tier1,tier3,tier4
>>
>> Thanks
>> Yumin
> 
>> _Mailing list message from [David Holmes](mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com) on [build-dev](mailto:build-dev at mail.openjdk.java.net):_
>>
>> Hi Yumin,
>>
>> On 23/06/2021 4:19 pm, Yumin Qi wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Please review
>>> systemDictionaryShared becomes fatter and fatter so it is time to split it into functional files. Moved security and jar operation related code into CDSProtectionDomain, and moved shared class info (DumpTime/RunTime) to sharedClassInfo.[ch]pp, also moved lambda proxy related to lambdaProxyClassInfo.hpp. This way systemDictionaryShared.cpp looks neat and light.
>>
>> I'm not really seeing a consistent or recognisable naming pattern here.
>> We seem to have a mix of:
>>
>> - cds/foo.cpp
>> - cds/fooShared.cpp
>> - cds/sharedFoo.cpp
>>
>> Can we establish a simple naming scheme here?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David
> 
> Thanks David. I was thinking of that too. The best practice is for a class Foo we have foo.hpp for definition and foo.cpp for implementation. Here indeed exists non-consistency that I put DumpTime/RunTtime in a single file. Let me double check and update.

That's not what I was saying. I'm talking about the names of the cpp 
file and whether they contain "shared" and whether it is a prefix or 
postfix. There doesn't seem to be a consistent naming scheme employed here.

Thanks,
David

> Yumin
> 
> -------------
> 
> PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4568
>