RFR: JDK-8085822 JEP 223: New Version-String Scheme (initial integration)
Magnus Ihse Bursie
magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com
Tue Jun 9 13:36:55 UTC 2015
On 2015-06-09 15:26, Claes Redestad wrote:
> On 2015-06-09 15:12, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>>> langtools/src/java.compiler/share/classes/javax/lang/model/SourceVersion.java
>>>
>>> old L171: case "1.9":
>>> new L171: case "9":
>>> Should this logic support both versions? Will dropping
>>> "1.9" here prevent a pre-version changeset JVM from
>>> being dropped into a JDK for triage purposes?
>>>
>>> Granted we don't often triage 'javac' with different JVMs,
>>> but...
>> I'll defer that question to Kumar, who wrote that piece of code. My
>> guess is that when Hotspot express was dropped, the ability to use a
>> JVM from another JDK release bit rotteded away.
>>
>> /Magnus
>
> While we know there's no guarantee that swapping in an older VM will
> work, in the face of a regression in a promoted build we still
> routinely (automatically, even) swap out the VM with a recent VM to
> get a rough estimate of whether the regression was caused by a HotSpot
> or JDK/tools change, mostly since this currently saves us time in
> narrowing down the changes to bisect over/investigate. So, there's at
> least some value in not intentionally breaking build-to-build
> backwards compatibility, but we don't expect it to always work and
> wouldn't make much fuss about it breaking. If an extra case "1.9" is
> all it takes to make it work with last week's VM, however...
Actually, I think I messed up a bit there. I believe the real question
here was not about mixing different versions of Hotspot and the JDK, but
mixing different versions of javac and the JDK. I think. :)
/Magnus
More information about the nashorn-dev
mailing list