Hi Tom, Am Mittwoch, den 11.01.2006, 11:19 -0700 schrieb Tom Tromey: > >>>>> "Roman" == Roman Kennke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Roman> So, should I check this in? > > Yes, but... > > Roman> + if (idx <= 0) /* added this test to avoid > Roman> + * ArrayIndexOutOfBounds when Hashtable is > Roman> + * modified concurrently, return null in this > Roman> + * case. see test > Roman> + * > com.aicas.jamaica.testlet.bugdb.JB00310.EnumerateAndModify > Roman> + * --Fridi. > Roman> + */ > > A few nits about this: we don't usually use long end-of-line comments, > it would be better to have an inline comment before the test. Also we > don't ordinarily mention people's names or reference test cases which > aren't in Mauve.
Whoops, this must have sneaked in somehow. In my actual sources I already removed these lines... > Could you put that test case in Mauve? That would be best since it > would be run by the regular regression tester. Sure. > Roman> + * appear in the enumeration. The spec says nothing about this, but > Roman> + * the "Java Class Libraries" book infers that modifications to the > > This should be 'implies', not 'infers'. This occurs in a couple > places. Thank you for pointing this out. I'll adjust that. /Roman
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ Classpath-patches mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches
