Stories with Tag OpenJDK

• JEP draft: Prepare to make final mean final

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-03-31 19:35:51

  Verbose tl;dr

  This JEP proposes preparing the Java platform for a future where final truly means final, eliminating the current capability of dynamically modifying final fields via reflection or other privileged code. The goal is to improve performance, security, and maintainability by enabling further runtime optimizations based on the immutability guarantees of final. This JEP focuses on identifying and mitigating compatibility risks posed by this change, such as existing frameworks and libraries that rely on altering final fields. It outlines an incremental approach involving a new JVM command-line option to enforce final field immutability, allowing developers to test and adapt their code before the restriction becomes the default and eventually permanent. This preparatory work will pave the way for a subsequent JEP to actually finalize the behavior of final.

  This Java Enhancement Proposal (JEP) draft, titled "Prepare to make final mean final," meticulously outlines a preparatory phase for a future enhancement to the Java language aimed at strengthening the semantics of the final keyword for classes and methods. Currently, the final keyword, while signifying immutability in certain contexts (like preventing variable reassignment and subclassing), does not fully guarantee the immutability of the runtime behavior of a designated final class or method. Specifically, dynamic language features like reflection and method handles can circumvent the final designation, potentially altering the behavior of a class or method deemed final and impacting maintainability, security, and performance optimization efforts.

  This JEP itself does not implement the full restriction of final’s meaning; rather, it focuses on the necessary groundwork to enable such a change in the future. This groundwork comprises two principal actions. Firstly, it proposes the introduction of a command-line option, provisionally named --enable-preview-final-classes, which developers can utilize to activate stricter final semantics on a per-project basis. This "preview" mode will allow developers to experiment with the enhanced final behavior and assess its impact on their codebases before its full enforcement. Secondly, the JEP outlines the development of a migration tool designed to assist developers in identifying and addressing potential compatibility issues stemming from the stricter interpretation of final. This tool will help to smooth the transition by flagging areas where reflection or method handles are currently employed to modify the behavior of final classes or methods, providing developers with the opportunity to adapt their code before the eventual firm enforcement of the strengthened final semantics. This phased approach ensures a more controlled and less disruptive transition for the Java ecosystem, minimizing the potential for widespread compatibility issues. The ultimate goal, after this preparatory phase, is to make final truly "final" and thereby bolster the guarantees and assumptions developers can make regarding the behavior of their code, ultimately contributing to more robust and maintainable Java applications.

  • Java
  • JDK
  • OpenJDK
  • JEP
  • Java Enhancement Proposal
  • Finalization
  • Garbage Collection
  • memory management
  • performance
  • JVM

  Summary of Comments ( 112 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43538919

  Verbose tl;dr

  HN commenters largely discuss the implications of making final mean truly final in Java. Some express concern about the performance impact, particularly for JIT compilers and escape analysis. Others question the practicality and benefit, given the existing workarounds like sealed classes and the potential disruption to existing codebases. A few commenters welcome the change, seeing it as a positive step toward stricter immutability and potentially simplifying some aspects of the language. There's also discussion around the nuances of the proposal, such as its impact on method overriding and the interaction with reflection. Several users highlight the complexity of implementing this change in the JVM and the potential for unforeseen consequences.

  The Hacker News post titled "JEP draft: Prepare to make final mean final" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43538919) discussing the JEP draft at https://openjdk.org/jeps/8349536, has a moderate number of comments, exploring different facets of the proposed change.

  Several commenters discuss the implications for mocking frameworks like Mockito. One user points out the potential difficulties this change poses for testing and mocking, as overriding final methods is a common technique employed by these frameworks. They question the practicality of the proposed solution of using method handles for mocking, expressing concern about the performance overhead and complexity it might introduce. Another user suggests that this change might push developers towards compile-time mocking solutions or different testing strategies altogether. The discussion around Mockito highlights a significant trade-off between stricter language semantics and the flexibility required for testing.

  The performance implications of the JEP are also a topic of discussion. One commenter questions whether the potential performance gains from this change are significant enough to justify the disruption it would cause to existing codebases and testing practices. Another user counters this by arguing that while the immediate performance gains might be minimal, it lays the groundwork for future optimizations by the JVM, enabling more aggressive inlining and other optimizations based on the guarantee of finality.

  Another thread of discussion revolves around the meaning of "final" in other languages and contexts. A commenter draws parallels to C++, noting the different meanings of "const" in different contexts and expressing a preference for Java's clearer distinction between final fields and final methods. This comparison highlights the nuances of the concept of "finality" in object-oriented programming.

  One user brings up the issue of inner classes accessing fields of the enclosing class, a situation where the effective finality of fields is important for performance but not explicitly enforced by the final keyword. They suggest that the JEP could clarify the treatment of such effectively final fields.

  Some users express general support for the JEP, viewing it as a step towards cleaner and more predictable code. They argue that the current behavior of "final" can be confusing and that enforcing its intended meaning would lead to more robust and maintainable programs.

  Finally, there's a short discussion about the practicality of migrating existing codebases to comply with this change. One commenter suggests that automated tooling could help with the transition, mitigating the potential disruption.

  Overall, the comments reflect a mixed reception to the proposed JEP. While some appreciate the stricter semantics and potential performance benefits, others express concerns about the impact on testing practices and the effort required for migration. The discussion highlights the complex trade-offs involved in evolving a mature language like Java.

• Let's Take a Look at JEP 483: Ahead-of-Time Class Loading and Linking

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-03-28 11:11:55

  Verbose tl;dr

  JEP 483 introduces a new class loading and linking mechanism called "ahead-of-time" (AOT) loading, aimed at improving startup performance. Unlike the existing dynamic class loading, AOT processes class data during build time, generating a dedicated archive. This archive contains pre-linked classes, readily available at startup, reducing the runtime overhead associated with verification and resolution. While AOT can significantly decrease startup time, particularly for applications with large class hierarchies, it comes with trade-offs. AOT-generated archives increase disk space consumption and require dedicated build-time tooling. Additionally, AOT doesn't replace dynamic class loading entirely; it complements it, handling a predefined set of classes while dynamic loading manages the rest. JEP 483 intends to improve startup, not overall performance, and introduces a new tool called jaotc to facilitate AOT compilation.

  The blog post "Let's Take a Look at JEP 483: Ahead-of-Time Class Loading and Linking" by Rafael Winterhalter delves into the motivations, mechanics, and potential impact of JEP 483, a Java Enhancement Proposal aiming to improve application startup time. The author begins by highlighting the perennial challenge of slow startup times in Java applications, especially concerning larger applications and the impact on short-lived processes like serverless functions. Traditional class loading, performed dynamically at runtime, is identified as a significant contributor to this startup overhead. JEP 483 proposes to mitigate this by introducing ahead-of-time (AOT) class loading and linking, allowing a significant portion of this process to be completed before the application even begins execution.

  The core idea behind JEP 483 is to generate, during the build process, a specialized archive known as an "AOT library." This archive contains pre-processed class data, effectively representing a snapshot of the class loading and linking that would traditionally occur at runtime. At startup, the Java Virtual Machine (JVM) can then load these pre-processed classes directly from the AOT library, significantly reducing the work required during the initial phases of execution. The blog post emphasizes that this approach is not about compiling Java code into native machine code, like GraalVM Native Image, but rather about optimizing the class loading process within the JVM itself.

  The author then proceeds to explain the technical intricacies of AOT libraries, detailing how they are created using the jaotc tool and how they are integrated with the JVM at runtime. The blog post carefully distinguishes between class loading and linking, explaining how JEP 483 tackles both aspects. Loading involves finding and reading class files, while linking involves verifying and preparing the classes for execution. AOT compilation addresses both of these, allowing the JVM to bypass much of the traditional overhead. The jaotc tool analyzes the application's classes and dependencies, generating optimized representations that the JVM can readily consume. The blog post notes that specific JVM flags are necessary to instruct the runtime to use these AOT libraries, enabling developers to control the adoption of this feature.

  Furthermore, the author explores the potential benefits and limitations of JEP 483. A significant advantage highlighted is the potential for drastically reduced startup time, which is particularly beneficial for serverless functions and other short-lived applications. However, the blog post also acknowledges that AOT libraries introduce trade-offs. They can increase the overall size of the application's deployment artifacts and potentially limit dynamic class loading capabilities. The author also emphasizes that JEP 483 is primarily designed for applications running on closed-world assumptions, meaning the classes required at runtime are known in advance. Dynamically loading classes outside this pre-defined set might still incur the traditional runtime overhead. Finally, the author notes that JEP 483 represents an ongoing development effort, and further refinements and enhancements are expected as the technology matures. This experimental nature implies that the specific implementation details, including the use of jaotc and relevant JVM flags, might be subject to change in future releases.

  • Java
  • JEP 483
  • AOT
  • Ahead-of-Time Compilation
  • Class Loading
  • linking
  • performance
  • JVM
  • virtual machine
  • OpenJDK
  • Java Development Kit

  Summary of Comments ( 19 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43503960

  Verbose tl;dr

  HN commenters generally express interest in JEP 483's potential performance benefits, particularly faster startup times. Some highlight the complexity of the proposed changes and the potential for subtle bugs. A few commenters question the necessity of AOT given existing JIT compiler advancements, while others point out that AOT can offer advantages beyond raw startup speed, such as reduced memory footprint and improved warmup times. One commenter notes the limited scope of the initial JEP, applying only to platform classes, and wonders about future expansion to application classes. Another expresses concern about the potential security implications of pre-compiled code. Several users discuss the interplay between AOT compilation and existing JIT compilation, specifically how the two might be used together effectively.

  The Hacker News post discussing JEP 483: Ahead-of-Time Class Loading and Linking has generated a moderate number of comments, exploring various aspects of the proposed changes.

  Several commenters express enthusiasm for the potential performance improvements that AOT compilation could bring to Java applications. They highlight the possibility of faster startup times and reduced runtime overhead as key benefits. Some specifically mention the impact on serverless functions and other cloud-native deployments where cold starts are a significant concern.

  A recurring theme in the comments is the trade-off between AOT compilation and the dynamic nature of Java. Some users raise concerns about the potential loss of flexibility in class loading and runtime code generation. They question how JEP 483 will handle scenarios involving dynamic class loading and modification, which are common in certain Java frameworks and applications.

  There's discussion around the complexity of implementing and maintaining AOT compilation. Commenters acknowledge the engineering effort required to make this feature robust and efficient. They also touch on the potential challenges of debugging and profiling AOT-compiled code.

  Some users express skepticism about the practical benefits of JEP 483, particularly in comparison to existing JIT compilation techniques. They argue that modern JIT compilers are already highly optimized and that the gains from AOT might be marginal in many cases.

  A few commenters draw parallels to similar AOT efforts in other languages and runtime environments, such as .NET and Native Image. They discuss the lessons learned from these projects and how they might apply to the Java ecosystem.

  Finally, there are some questions and speculations about the long-term implications of JEP 483 for the Java platform. Some commenters wonder how it will interact with existing features like reflection and dynamic proxies, and how it might influence the future evolution of the Java language.