[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-hotspot-runtime-dev
Subject:    Re: JNI VERSION CHANGE: RFR: 8145098: JNI GetVersion should return JNI_VERSION_9
From:       Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman () oracle ! com>
Date:       2016-02-19 8:00:25
Message-ID: 56C6CB99.6080609 () oracle ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 19/02/2016 03:10, Iris Clark wrote:
> Hi, Alan and Rachel.
> 
> Here's a proposal for the new text for JEP 223:
> 
> ---
> 
> [ insert between existing sections "@since..." and "Mercurial..."]
> 
> JNI Version
> 
> The [JNI Specification][JNISpec] defines a constant representing the JNI version \
> number.  The constant will drop the initial "1" and truncate trailing zeros.  Thus, \
> for JDK 9, the constant will be 'JNI_VERSION_9'. 
> [JNISpec]:
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/jni/spec/functions.html#version_information
>  
> ---
> 
> What bugid should be used for this CCC request?  What is the procedure for updating \
> the JNI Spec itself? 
> 
This wording looks okay to me and I assume it could go on to say that 
the constant will also be proposed for Java SE 9. JDK-8145098 is the 
issue that is being used to update the JNI version.

While we're at it, could I interest you in a 2-for-1 deal where JEP 223 
also captures the update to the JVM TI version? We've added 
JVMTI_VERSION_9 in the jake forest and it would be nice to get agreement 
on aligning the JVM TI version number (and also get it into JDK 9 in 
advance of the module system).

-Alan.


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]