On 4/20/11 9:00 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
Stuart Marks wrote:
Hi all,
Please review an updated webrev for this bug:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/6896297/webrev.1/
Using ConcurrentHashMap is much nicer in many ways, and it seems to resolve
the JCK failures at least as well as the previous fix did. This does nothing
to remedy the issue of snapshot consistency, which seems to be covered by
4945726, which we'll postpone (again) to a future release.
This is nicer and apologies for raising the concern about serialization
compatibility - I incorrectly thought that these tables were declared as
HashMaps.
At L242 you might want to include a comment to remind a future maintainer why
it's a zero length array rather than using size().
Yes, good idea; I had puzzled over this a bit myself and indeed I had gotten it
wrong the first time. I'll add a comment and push the fix.
s'marks
