> On 16 Mar 2017, at 13:27, Pavel Rappo <pavel.ra...@oracle.com> wrote: > > Paul, > > One more question. I have read Version's javadoc and my impression is that > Version could be a value-type class. Is that right? >
I suppose it could if there were such a thing as of today. It's not explicitly called out as being value-based as is the case for Optional, is that where your are thinking of heading? Paul. >> On 16 Mar 2017, at 18:05, Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 16 Mar 2017, at 08:27, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: >>> >>> 2017/3/16 8:17:03 -0700, pavel.ra...@oracle.com: >>>> Please review the following trivial change for [1]: >>>> >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8160956/webrev.00/ >>> >>> Looks good to me. >>> >>>> ... >>>> >>>> P.S. While we are in this area, may I ask if anybody knows why exactly >>>> Version >>>> class has lost its 'final' modifier while moving from 'jdk' package to >>>> 'java.lang' [2]? >>> >>> I have no idea. This class really ought to be final. >>> >> >> Yes, Pavel unless there is some non-obvious here (which i think is unlikely) >> i suggest you make it so, update your patch, test, then push! >> >> Paul. >
