Mike,
I'm happy with the latest wording, it looks much better.
-Chris.
On 23/12/2010 01:23, Mike Duigou wrote:
Here's another try that tries to use similar wording to Collection:
*
*pCare must also be exercised when using collections that have
* restrictions on the elements
Hi Chris,
(Sorry for top-posting, my stupid email program cannot do proper quoting)
I don't understand why the CR is a 'request for enhancement' with 'very low'
priority. A memory leak should be a bug with at least high priority in my world
view.
I will see if I find time to implement a fix.
On 23/12/2010 10:53, Roman Kennke wrote:
Hi Chris,
(Sorry for top-posting, my stupid email program cannot do proper quoting)
I don't understand why the CR is a 'request for enhancement' with 'very low'
priority. A memory leak should be a bug with at least high priority in my world
view.
I
Changeset: ccc68bc57c82
Author:cl
Date: 2010-12-16 18:17 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/corba/rev/ccc68bc57c82
Added tag jdk7-b122 for changeset 1523a060032c
! .hgtags
Changeset: 88ac4daf5d0e
Author:yhuang
Date: 2010-12-05 20:09 -0800
URL:
Changeset: d61adc5101e0
Author:cl
Date: 2010-12-16 18:17 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/rev/d61adc5101e0
Added tag jdk7-b122 for changeset f1591eed71f6
! .hgtags
Changeset: 55566844106b
Author:ohair
Date: 2010-12-06 10:37 -0800
URL:
Changeset: ced66f2b52cf
Author:cl
Date: 2010-12-16 18:17 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/jaxp/rev/ced66f2b52cf
Added tag jdk7-b122 for changeset 03ff13d19c8f
! .hgtags
Changeset: 68ef5e4375d5
Author:ohair
Date: 2010-12-03 08:44 -0800
URL:
Changeset: f74fc1dbef46
Author:cl
Date: 2010-12-16 18:17 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/jaxws/rev/f74fc1dbef46
Added tag jdk7-b122 for changeset 17b6c48a3449
! .hgtags
Changeset: 0f117d4f6847
Author:ohair
Date: 2010-12-03 08:44 -0800
URL:
Changeset: e8ef99adf42b
Author:cl
Date: 2010-12-16 18:18 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/jdk/rev/e8ef99adf42b
Added tag jdk7-b122 for changeset ac311eb325bf
! .hgtags
Changeset: beb9f3298ad3
Author:andrew
Date: 2010-11-23 02:17 +
URL:
Changeset: 9968ce958706
Author:cl
Date: 2010-12-16 18:18 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/langtools/rev/9968ce958706
Added tag jdk7-b122 for changeset 11e7b4c0476e
! .hgtags
Changeset: 4f086529d05c
Author:mfang
Date: 2010-12-03 20:31 -0800
URL:
Changeset: dd38bab326a3
Author:jjh
Date: 2010-12-23 10:08 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/langtools/rev/dd38bab326a3
7008869: Debug printlns accidentally added to make/build.xml
Summary: Delete bogus echo statements
Reviewed-by: ksrini
! make/build.xml
I have updated the webrev with the javadoc changes (identical to below) and
Ulf's suggested code changes:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/6728865.3/webrev/
Mike
On Dec 23 2010, at 02:02 , Chris Hegarty wrote:
Mike,
I'm happy with the latest wording, it looks much better.
-Chris.
Feedback is on webrev.02
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/7000511/webrev.02/webrev/ :
* PrintStream
- .flush(), close(), most println() methods synchronize on this for their
entire implementation. They could just be made synchronized methods.
- The javadoc for append(CharSequence,int,int)
Am 23.12.2010 20:46, schrieb Mike Duigou:
I have updated the webrev with the javadoc changes (identical to below) and
Ulf's suggested code changes:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/6728865.3/webrev/
Thanks, I could convince you mostly.
But, IMO, the inner comments are too expatiated (less
Changeset: 5beec82bf20d
Author:ksrini
Date: 2010-12-23 13:51 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/jdk/rev/5beec82bf20d
7002386: (launcher) fix XshowSettings
Reviewed-by: darcy, mchung, naoto
! src/share/bin/java.c
! src/share/classes/sun/launcher/LauncherHelper.java
!
Am 23.12.2010 22:24, schrieb Ulf Zibis:
Aren't the explanation comments from my last example clear enough and more
fluently readable?
For clarification:
// collections to iterate and examine containment on
Collection? iterate = c1;
Collection? contains = c2;
Am 23.12.2010 22:24, schrieb Ulf Zibis:
Aren't the explanation comments from my last example clear enough and more
fluently readable?
Shouldn't we examine the size at first? :
// collections to iterate and examine containment on
Collection? iterate = c1;
Collection?
Changeset: e8719f95f2d0
Author:jjh
Date: 2010-12-23 12:29 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/langtools/rev/e8719f95f2d0
6982992: Tests CheckAttributedTree.java, JavacTreeScannerTest.java, and
SourceTreeeScannerTest.java timeout
Summary: Hoist some invariant code out of
Ulf, a previous email by Remi said only to invoke size() if the collection
is a Set.
Paul
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Ulf Zibis ulf.zi...@gmx.de wrote:
Am 23.12.2010 22:24, schrieb Ulf Zibis:
Aren't the explanation comments from my last example clear enough and more
fluently readable?
18 matches
Mail list logo