RFR: JDK-8007373 Inet6Address serialization incompatibility

[Chris Hegarty]

On 04/02/2013 12:38 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 31/03/2013 15:16, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> Thanks for taking this Mark. It was my change that introduced this
>> incompatibility.
>>
>> The source changes look fine to me. In fact, the removal of
>> scope_ifname_set was not necessary for the original fix, just "bad"
>> clean up. Also, there is no need to reset its default value where
>> declared.
>>
>> The test needs the usual GPL header. We never call exit from a test,
>> but it looks like this only possible during generation of the static
>> byte arrays.
>>
>> -Chris
> I'm curious if it is really necessary to re-introduce this field. Would
> there be any issues if it were just remained in the serialized form and
> written as true when scope_ifname is not null?  If there are any issues

I believe this option should work too. But it is really a trade off 
between simplicity and the more complicated serialPersistentFields. I'm 
ok with either.

I just wanted to mention, that I inadvertently removed this field as 
superfluous cleanup when fixing another bug. Whether the field exists in 
the class, or just the serial form, does not impact on the original fix. 
The problem is that this private field was never needed in the first 
place, and also if added should have been transient.

> then the proposed change is okay (except for a minor issue with the
> comment format in readObject).
>
> I don't have time to review the test but I assume you have reviewed it
> (it's a lot bigger than I would have expected). One comment is that
> there might be an opportunity to get rid of the existing Serialize test
> in that directory and to rename the new test.

Yes, that would be nice.

-Chris.

>
> -Alan.
>
>
>
>