RFR(S):8252629:jmap histo should accept "parallel" option without any specified value(Internet mail)

[linzang(臧琳)]

Hi Serguei,
    Thanks for your reminder!
    Yes, just checked we have discussed that before. I will close the bug.

BRs,
Lin

> On Sep 2, 2020, at 11:22 AM, "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com" <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Lin,
> 
> I agree with David.
> If I remember correctly, we already discussed this in the CSR for parallel flag and decided it should not be accepted without a value.
> 
> Thanks,
> Serguei
> 
> 
>> On 9/1/20 16:51, David Holmes wrote:
>> Hi Lin,
>> 
>>> On 1/09/2020 7:06 pm, linzang(臧琳) wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> 
>>>       Please help review this small change about jmap -histo:parallel
>>> 
>>>       Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252629
>>> 
>>>       webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lzang/8252629/webrev.00/
>>> 
>>>       The problem is that "jmap -histo:parallel" command prompt error message "Fail: invalid option: 'parallel'.". Because "parallel=<N>" option is supported by specification, and "parallel=0" is defined as the default behavior. it is better to make "jmap -histo:parallel" behave same as the "jmap -histo:parallel=0". Please see description in the bug for more details.
>> 
>> I don't agree that this is desirable. Is there any precedent for accepting a flag this way and have it mean "use the default"? To me this is a user error indicating that they don't understand what the parallel flag means.
>> 
>> David
>> -----
>> 
>>>       Moreover, does a CSR required for this issue? IMHO, it may not be necessary as specification already mention "parallel=0" is the default behavior. But it doesn't describe the exact behavior of "parallel without any specified value", may I ask your opinion about the CSR?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> BRs,
>>> 
>>> Lin
>>> 
>>> 
> 
>