RFR: 8347753: VetoableListDecorator doesn't accept its own sublists for bulk operations [v2]

[Michael Strauß]

On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 18:26:37 GMT, Andy Goryachev <angorya at openjdk.org> wrote:

> One possible alternative is to create the defensive copy each time, this will save one extra pointer every time an iterator or a sublist gets created (these objects might be long lived). The code in this PR creates a copy in many (most?) cases anyway, and in my opinion, the memory is more precious resource that CPU cycles (i.e. using extra memory costs many more CPU cycles in garbage collection etc.), so please consider that.

I don't quite understand what you mean. Can you elaborate?
In particular, what does "save one extra pointer" mean?

> modules/javafx.base/src/test/java/test/javafx/collections/VetoableObservableListTest.java line 212:
> 
>> 210:         list.addAll(list.subList(0, 2));
>> 211:         assertSingleCall(new String[] {"foo", "bar"}, new int[] {4, 4});
>> 212:     }
> 
> suggestion: also check that the list contains the newly added elements?
> (here and in added tests that involve subList?)

I've added checks for the list content in all modified tests.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1679#issuecomment-2616596847
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1679#discussion_r1931014326