RFR (12): 8191053: Provide a mechanism to make system's security manager immutable

[Sean Mullan]

On 10/2/18 2:47 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 02/10/2018 16:34, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Thanks for all the comments so far, and the interesting discussions 
>> about the future of the SecurityManager. We will definitely return to 
>> those discussions in the near future, but for now I have a second 
>> webrev ready for review for this enhancement:
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mullan/webrevs/8191053/webrev.01/
> I see the mails between you and Mandy about not using the double equals 
> and using "allow" and "disallow". That makes sense as it is consistent 
> with "default" and the chances of someone of having a SM class named 
> "allow" or "disallow" isn't wroth worrying about.
> 
> In System.java L85 it has "utilize" and might be clearer to stick with 
> "set".

That sentence already has "setting" in it, so I think it would sound 
confusing to also have "set". I changed it to "use". I think this is 
fine since the previous sentence talks about setting the security 
manager at startup, and this sentence explains how you do that.

> L88 has "installed at startup" where it might be more consistent 
> to use "set" there too.

Ok.

--Sean