Initial webrev with changes for JDK 9

[Mandy Chung]

> On Mar 8, 2016, at 1:37 PM, Naoto Sato <naoto.sato at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I reviewed ResourceBundle code and related locale data changes. Overall it looks good to me. Here are some minor comments:
> 
> java.util.ResourceBundle.java
> 
> - In the class description, there are two occurrences of example explaing service provider type (i.e., basename+"Provider"). It seems a bit redundant. If they should be there in both locations, then I'd use the same example. Currently, one base name is "p.MyResources", and the other is "com.example.app.MyResources”.

I changed it to com.example.app.

> - This is sort of a hypothetical situation but what if a named module provides both local ResourceBundle, and a ResourceBundleProvider that "happens" to have that base name but returns a different bundle implementation? I guess ResourceBundleProvider wins,

If the module provides ResourceBundleProvider, it will not search its local resource bundle.

> and I would expect that precedence described somewhere.
> 

It’s described here:

 246  * In named modules, the loaded service providers for the given base name are
 247  * used to load resource bundles. If no service providers are available, or if
 248  * none of the service providers returns a resource bundle and the caller module
 249  * doesn't have its own service provider, the {@code getBundle} factory method
 250  * searches for resource bundles local to the caller module.

> - Line 626-630: This comment of CacheKey class should include some description for the newly added "module" key. Same is true for line 1620-1623.
> 
> sun.util.resources.LocaleData.java
> 
> - line 233: Can be removed, as it is redundant.
> 

Removed.

Mandy

> Naoto
> 
> On 3/8/16 7:48 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> 
>> I've refreshed the webrevs here:
>>   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alanb/8142968/1
>> 
>> so that we have a snapshot of what is currently in the jigsaw/jake
>> forest. The webrves are against jdk-9+108.
>> 
>> I plan to send mail to jdk9-dev soon proposing that we integrate a
>> snapshot into JDK 9 before the end of March.
>> 
>> -Alan.