On 02/10/2013 13:03, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Oct 2, 2013, at 1:34 PM, Chris Hegarty<[email protected]> wrote:
The change looks fine to me.
Thanks.
Just curious why we don't allow sizes equal to Nodes.MAX_ARRAY_SIZE? Rather
less than.
Hmm... well observed, it's most likely a one off error due to it being confused
with the exclusive upper bound for an index. It is consistently used like that
throughout the code base. Don't wanna change that just now, i can do it later.
Yes, that is what I thought. And I agree it is a separate, less
important, issue.
-Chris.
Paul.
