+1
-phil.
On 12/7/16, 5:34 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
The patch has been updated as suggested and the existing test has been modified
to verify the changes:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8169725/webrev.02/
Thanks,
Brian
On Dec 7, 2016, at 5:09 PM, Brian
The patch has been updated as suggested and the existing test has been modified
to verify the changes:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8169725/webrev.02/
Thanks,
Brian
On Dec 7, 2016, at 5:09 PM, Brian Burkhalter
wrote:
> I was expecting that; will update.
>
>
I was expecting that; will update.
Thanks,
Brian
On Dec 7, 2016, at 5:03 PM, Philip Race wrote:
> Looks OK except for the same question about using 0x.
>
> -phil.
>
> On 12/6/16, 12:31 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
>> Continuing from thread [1].
>>
>> Pursuant
No particular reason. I suspect you are correct that it is more recognizable so
I’ll change it.
Thanks,
Brian
On Dec 7, 2016, at 5:01 PM, Philip Race wrote:
> One "PS"
> why say 4294967295 in the spec where 0x is probably
> more immediately to most
Looks OK except for the same question about using 0x.
-phil.
On 12/6/16, 12:31 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
Continuing from thread [1].
Pursuant to comments from the CCC, the patch [2] has been updated. The changes
with respect to the previous version of the patch [3] are to clarify
One "PS"
why say 4294967295 in the spec where 0x is probably
more immediately to most programmers that it is not a random
choice of number ?
-phil
On 12/7/16, 4:56 PM, Philip Race wrote:
+1
Yes, it needs a CCC update. A quick "bug fix" one.
-phil.
On 12/6/16, 2:03 PM, Brian
+1
Yes, it needs a CCC update. A quick "bug fix" one.
-phil.
On 12/6/16, 2:03 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
Please review at your convenience:
Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169728
Patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8169728/webrev.00/
To the primary constructor
Reprising thread [1].
Issue: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2016-August/007449.html
Patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8154058/webrev.01/
Doc:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8154058/tiff_metadata.html#MetadataIssuesRead
Note that this is a preliminary version as
Hi All,
Please review a fix for jdk9 where it is seen that "Banner" checkbox in
printer dialog is disabled in ubuntu16.10.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170579
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psadhukhan/8170579/webrev.00/
Issue was, in ubuntu16.10 the attribute map does