RFR(M): 8220628: Move the HeapMonitor library to C++

[Jean Christophe Beyler]

Hi Chris,

Thanks for the review, we could debate here about reinterpret vs static (my
theory/understanding was do static if all else fails (and then do C style
if that fails)) but really I'm going to do new/delete right after this and
so all those casts will disappear in the next webrev. So in my opinion if
your Looks good can be a LGTM then we will remove the casts in the next
ones.

Let me know what you think.

Thanks,
Jc



On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 5:59 PM Chris Plummer <chris.plummer at oracle.com>
wrote:

> Hi JC,
>
> Looks good. My only question is your use of reinterpret_cast instead of
> static_cast. Not an area of C++ I know much about, other than  having just
> read some varying opinions that aren't all that good at explaining what's
> going on.
>
> thanks,
>
> Chris
>
> On 3/13/19 4:07 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Could I get a review of:
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8220628
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcbeyler/8220628/
>
> I've not tried to do anything special here to keep the review simple; in
> the next webrev or two, I'll move more code to more C++ style and then work
> on diagnostic print-outs (in C++ :-)) to figure out the issues with the
> bugs related to these tests.
>
> This passed testing on my dev machine and a submit repo run (which I'm not
> sure runs these test but still good to check).
>
> Thanks!
> Jc
>
>
>

-- 

Thanks,
Jc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/attachments/20190313/da882983/attachment-0001.html>