On 07/07/2016 10:25 AM, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
On 7/7/2016 7:48 PM, Ajit Ghaisas wrote:
Thanks Phil for the review.
Please find my answers below.
Semyon, can you please comment on Phil's question below?
I agree with this change. The check is not needed.
Ok. so the fix overall seems fine in
On 7/7/2016 7:48 PM, Ajit Ghaisas wrote:
Thanks Phil for the review.
Please find my answers below.
Semyon, can you please comment on Phil's question below?
I agree with this change. The check is not needed.
--Semyon
Regards,
Ajit
-Original Message-
From: Phil Race
Sent: Wednesday,
Thanks Phil for the review.
Please find my answers below.
Semyon, can you please comment on Phil's question below?
Regards,
Ajit
-Original Message-
From: Phil Race
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 2:02 AM
To: Ajit Ghaisas
Cc: Sergey Bylokhov; Erik Joelsson; 2d-dev;
It is not always clear to me what warning is being suppressed and why you have
chosen a particular solution/action
this next one looks like it might introduce an unused variable warning.
What was it solving ? That the code was not checking a return value ?
size_t bytesWritten = write (
Hello,
I'm happy with the makefile changes, unless anyone else could come up
with a solution for any of the remaining warnings.
/Erik
On 2016-06-23 09:09, Ajit Ghaisas wrote:
Hi,
Bug :
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074824
(Resolve disabled warnings for libawt_xawt)
Hi,
Bug :
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074824
(Resolve disabled warnings for libawt_xawt)
As part of fixing this bug, I have -
1. Fixed warnings in source code after removing blanket warning
suppressions from makefile.
2. In case the warning fix is not possible,
