On 23/12/2011 21:55, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Brandon,
This looks okay to me.
Thumbs up from me too.
-Chris.
Just to clarify for other readers, the change to CopyOnWriteArrayList
doesn't use Objects.requireNonNull because this code has to sync up with
Doug Lea's jsr166 repository which runs on multiple version of the
platform (some without requireNonNull).
Also CopyOnWriteArraySet is fixed implicitly by the fix to
CopyOnWriteArrayList.
David
On 24/12/2011 3:30 AM, Brandon Passanisi wrote:
Here's an updated webrev for review for 4802647, which also contains a
fix for 7123424. 7123424, as noted below, is the newly filed bug
regarding the same bug behavior for CopyOnWriteArrayList and
CopyOnWriteArraySet. It seems best to combine the fix for both into one
webrev, so this webrev for review is a reflection of this:
Webrev URL:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpassani/4802647_7123424/3/webrev/
Thanks.
On 12/21/2011 11:23 AM, Brandon Passanisi wrote:
Yes, my intent was "extends AbstractSet<E>" instead of "extends
NewAbstractCollection<E>". I have reflected this in the updated webrev
below. Here's the information:
Webrev URL: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpassani/4802647/2/webrev/
Bug URL: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4802647
1. In MOAT.java, I changed NewAbstractSet to extend AbstractSet<E>.
2. The changes in 1) resulted in finding out that AbstractSet has the
same bug behavior with removeAll(null).
AbstractSet.removeAll(Collection<?> c) was updated accordingly.
3. I filed bug 7123424 to account for the same bug behavior found in
CopyOnWriteArrayList and CopyOnWriteArraySet.
4. It was advised that I skip the failing behavior of
CopyOnWriteArrayList and CopyOnWriteArraySet for
removeAll(null)/retainAll(null) in MOAT.java and provide a comment
about how the skip needs to be removed once bug 7123424 is fixed. This
is the reason for the instanceof checks that were recently added and
the added comments.
Thanks.
On 12/21/2011 7:52 AM, Jason Mehrens wrote:
> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:12:02 +1000
> From: david.hol...@oracle.com
> To: brandon.passan...@oracle.com
> Subject: Re: Code Review Request for Bug #4802647
> CC: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
>
> Brandon,
>
> I don't see the purpose of NewAbstractSet. It is identical to
> NewAbstractCollection.
I would assume the intent was "extends AbstractSet<E>" instead of
"extends NewAbstractCollection<E>".
Jason
