3 ms·

> Please, knock it off with the value judgements. "Ill-advised" according to whom? You? Why should your opinion prevail? Ill-advised as per the authors decisio

> Please, knock it off with the value judgements. "Ill-advised" according to whom? You? Why should your opinion prevail? Ill-advised as per the authors decision to remove said hack as it brought none of the intended benefits. Or are you suggesting that your opinion is more valuable than the authors whose code we're discussing? Be careful with fallacies suggesting only one side of an argument is based on opinions. :)

quotemstr 3y ago
The actual text from https://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug?bug_id=8327860 https://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug?bug_id=8327860 says this: > We have been working on a patch that switches the jit protection mode to EXEC around these potential faulting memory accesses. Yes, they're changing one aspect of signal handler use to work around this problem. They're not stopping the use of signal handlers in general. Hotspot continues to use signals for efficiency in general. See https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9059727df135dc90311bd476124f090b5766092b/src/hotspot/os/posix/signals_posix.cpp#L557 https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9059727df135dc90311bd476... > Be careful with fallacies suggesting only one side of an argument is based on opinions. :) The wonderful thing about choosing not to care about facts is having whatever opinions you want.
- arghwhat 3y ago
  > Yes, they're changing one aspect of signal handler use to work around this problem. They're not stopping the use of signal handlers in general. Hotspot continues to use signals for efficiency in general. See https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9059727df135dc90311bd476 https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9059727df135dc90311bd476... This whole thread is about SIGSEGV, and specifically their SIGSEGV handling. However, catching normal signals is not about efficiency. Some of their exception handling is still odd: There is no reason for a program that receives SIGILL to ever attempt continuing. But others is fine, like catching SIGFPE to just forward an exception to the calling code. (Sure, you could construct an argument to say that this is for efficiency if you considered the alternative to be implementing floating point in software so that all exceptions exist in user-space, but hardware floating point is the norm and such alternative would be wholly unreasonable.) > The wonderful thing about choosing not to care about facts is having whatever opinions you want. I appreciate the irony of you making such statement, proudly thinking that your opinion equals fact, and therefore any other opinion is not. This discussion is nothing but subjective opinion vs. subjective opinion. Facts are (hopefully, as I can only speak for myself) inputs to both our opinions, but no opinion about "good" or "bad", "nasty" or not can ever be objective. Objective code quality does not exist.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

quotemstr 3y ago

The actual text from https://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug?bug_id=8327860 https://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug?bug_id=8327860 says this: > We have been working on a patch that switches the jit protection mode to EXEC around these potential faulting memory accesses. Yes, they're changing one aspect of signal handler use to work around this problem. They're not stopping the use of signal handlers in general. Hotspot continues to use signals for efficiency in general. See https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9059727df135dc90311bd476124f090b5766092b/src/hotspot/os/posix/signals_posix.cpp#L557 https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9059727df135dc90311bd476... > Be careful with fallacies suggesting only one side of an argument is based on opinions. :) The wonderful thing about choosing not to care about facts is having whatever opinions you want.

arghwhat 3y ago
> Yes, they're changing one aspect of signal handler use to work around this problem. They're not stopping the use of signal handlers in general. Hotspot continues to use signals for efficiency in general. See https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9059727df135dc90311bd476 https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9059727df135dc90311bd476... This whole thread is about SIGSEGV, and specifically their SIGSEGV handling. However, catching normal signals is not about efficiency. Some of their exception handling is still odd: There is no reason for a program that receives SIGILL to ever attempt continuing. But others is fine, like catching SIGFPE to just forward an exception to the calling code. (Sure, you could construct an argument to say that this is for efficiency if you considered the alternative to be implementing floating point in software so that all exceptions exist in user-space, but hardware floating point is the norm and such alternative would be wholly unreasonable.) > The wonderful thing about choosing not to care about facts is having whatever opinions you want. I appreciate the irony of you making such statement, proudly thinking that your opinion equals fact, and therefore any other opinion is not. This discussion is nothing but subjective opinion vs. subjective opinion. Facts are (hopefully, as I can only speak for myself) inputs to both our opinions, but no opinion about "good" or "bad", "nasty" or not can ever be objective. Objective code quality does not exist.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]