Changeset: dd143033cef1
Author:sundar
Date: 2011-02-18 12:07 +0530
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/jdk/rev/dd143033cef1
7018459: javax.script code comments have issues with HTML4 validation and
Accessibility compliance
Reviewed-by: jjh
! src/share/classes/javax/script/Scri
I missed the mail about the fix given by Alan, please just ignore the
previous mail.
2011/2/18 Sean Chou
>
> Oh, I should have done a little more investigation.
>
> Is there a plan to fix it? I can provide a patch if it is needed.
>
> 2011/2/17 Alan Bateman
>
> Sean Chou wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
Oh, I should have done a little more investigation.
Is there a plan to fix it? I can provide a patch if it is needed.
2011/2/17 Alan Bateman
> Sean Chou wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I find there is a mismatch between the spec and the behavior of
>> java.io.FileOutputStream.getChannel().
>>
>> The spe
Changeset: 302877469037
Author:alanb
Date: 2011-02-17 20:50 +
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/jdk/rev/302877469037
6526860: (fc) FileChannel.position returns 0 when FileOutputStream opened in
append mode
Reviewed-by: forax
! src/share/classes/sun/nio/ch/FileChannelImpl
On 02/17/2011 10:34 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
Sean Chou wrote:
Hi,
I find there is a mismatch between the spec and the behavior of
java.io.FileOutputStream.getChannel().
The spec reads: "The initial position of the returned channel will be
equal to the number of bytes written to the file so
Steve Poole wrote:
:
What sort of testing did you have in mind? You mean run the zlib tests
and/or OpenJDK testcases?
To be honest, I don't know. The zip tests should clearly be run but they
are unlikely to stress the zip code in the same way that the IDEs, app
servers, and other big appli
Changeset: 15ef6cf616d6
Author:chegar
Date: 2011-02-17 09:56 +
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/jdk/rev/15ef6cf616d6
7017901: OOME in
java/util/concurrent/BlockingQueue/CancelledProducerConsumerLoops.java
Summary: Unbounded queues should be disabled in the test
Reviewed-
Sean Chou wrote:
Hi,
I find there is a mismatch between the spec and the behavior of
java.io.FileOutputStream.getChannel().
The spec reads: "The initial position of the returned channel will be
equal to the number of bytes written to the file so far unless this
stream is in append mode, in
Hi Jing LV,
As for your patch of HashMap I think we shouldn't do this. There are a lot of
places in code where we assume that every object equals to itself, not only in
HashMap (e.g. ArrayList.indexOf()).
In you case I believe that InvocationHandler impl is broken because it written
that way t
Hi guys,
I am reading the SocketPermission source code recently and find some
thing strange. Below is a simple test case to describe the strange thing:
SocketPermission star_All = new SocketPermission("*.java.net",
"listen,accept,connect");
SocketPermission www_All = new SocketPermission("jav
Jing LV wrote:
:
Thanks Remi. I've report this issue on the openjdk bugzilla.
Any other comments on this? Can someone help to raise this issue on Sun
bug system? Thanks in advance.
It's 7015589, sorry I should have been clearer in my mail of Jan 28 [1].
-Alan.
[1]
http://mail.openjdk.java
Hi,
I find there is a mismatch between the spec and the behavior of
java.io.FileOutputStream.getChannel().
The spec reads: "The initial position of the returned channel will be
equal to the number of bytes written to the file so far unless this
stream is in append mode, in which case it will
Hello, is there any other comments on this issue? Can someone help raise
a bug on Sun's bug system? Thanks.
? 2011-1-19 17:06, Jing LV ??:
Hi,
Thanks for information. I've raised a new bug on openjdk bug
system (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=100165) with
testcase and
于 2011-1-25 23:28, Rémi Forax 写道:
> On 01/25/2011 04:15 PM, Jing LV wrote:
>> Hello,
> Hi, you should report it as a bug even if I think that too many programs
> rely on that semantics so the spec should be updated instead of the
> implementation.
>
>> Find a similar problem with the one in the las
14 matches
Mail list logo
