Nathan Beyer wrote: > I made mods to them, so that they would compile. We've discussed this > in the past; there was some invalid generics syntax that was valid at > the point of the JSR166 PFD. For maintenance purposes, it was easier > to take the single tag of code from the concurrency CVS than try to do > a mish/mash approach. As such, there were a few compile errors. > > The problem in ConcurrentHashMap was in the putAll method; > Iterator<Map.Entry<? extends K, ? extends V> was change to Iterator<? > extends Map.Entry<? extends K, ? extends V>.
Sorry Nathan, I had missed/forgotten that. Such a simple change does not strike me as separately licenseable/copyrightable. Did you specifically want to see the ASF comment block in that file or would you be ok with a note in the implementation to show that it has been modified from the original? > I'll have to look into what I changed in the test file, if that's needed. ack. Regards, Tim > On 10/27/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Please do. All,as Tim said, we don't do mods to j.u.c.... >> >> geir >> >> >> Tim Ellison wrote: >> > Why do two files in standard concurrent code have the standard ASF >> > comment blocks? >> > >> > >> modules/concurrent/standard/src/main/java/java/util/concurrent/ConcurrentHashMap.java >> >> > >> modules/concurrent/standard/src/test/java/AtomicReferenceFieldUpdaterTest.java >> >> > >> > It's not clear that there are any local modifications to these files. >> > Unless somebody states otherwise I'll remove them. >> > >> > Regards >> > Tim >> > >> > -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
