Hi Mike,
some more questions:
public class HashmapK,V {
+int hash(Object k) {
+int h = hashSeed;
+if (k instanceof String) {
+return ((String) k).hash32();
+} else {
+h ^= k.hashCode();
+}
+
+// This function ensures that hashCodes
That link should be:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/4244896/webrev.04/
-Rob
On 31/05/12 16:05, Rob McKenna wrote:
Latest version including work on the spec language:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/4244896/webrev.04/
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erobm/4244896/webrev.03/
-Rob
On May 31 2012, at 01:40 , Ulf Zibis wrote:
Hi Mike,
some more questions:
public class HashmapK,V {
+int hash(Object k) {
+int h = hashSeed;
+if (k instanceof String) {
+return ((String) k).hash32();
+} else {
+h ^= k.hashCode();
+
Hi,
Looking for a reviewer for 7145913. This addresses an issue with where a
SQLException could be thrown when writing a row back with an auto-incremented
column on some databases.
Webrev is http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lancea/7145913/webrev.00/. RowSet TCK,
sqe tests and unit tests all pass
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Lance Andersen - Oracle
lance.ander...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
Looking for a reviewer for 7145913. This addresses an issue with where a
SQLException could be thrown when writing a row back with an auto-incremented
column on some databases.
Webrev is
On 05/31/12 12:58, Mike Duigou wrote:
So couldn't method hash(Object) be moved to AbstractMap?
The differences in the avalanche (XOR scrambling) preclude this. It could be
decided for Java 8 to use a consistent scrambling implementation. I would
want to hear from Doug Lea whether he thinks
Changeset: 0c6830e7241f
Author:mullan
Date: 2012-05-30 17:19 -0400
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/0c6830e7241f
6854712: Revocation checking enhancements (JEP-124)
6637288: Add OCSP support to PKIX CertPathBuilder implementation
7126011:
Here is the revision using the try with resources as David suggested
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lancea/7145913/webrev.01/
Best
Lance
On May 31, 2012, at 3:10 PM, David Schlosnagle wrote:
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Lance Andersen - Oracle
lance.ander...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
Looking
Hi.
185 public boolean waitFor(long timeout, TimeUnit unit)
186 throws InterruptedException {
187 long now = System.nanoTime();
188
189 long end = now +
190 (timeout = 0 ? 0 : TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS.convert(timeout,
unit));
191
Hi Rob,
This looks good to me. I'm glad to see that destroyForcibly mandates
that Process instances from ProcessBuilder.start and Runtime.exec must
do a forcible destroy. That addresses my concern about documenting the
actual implementations.
Two minor comments:
Process.java:
236 *
Jeff,
On 1/06/2012 10:19 AM, Jeff Hain wrote:
Hi.
185 public boolean waitFor(long timeout, TimeUnit unit)
186 throws InterruptedException {
187 long now = System.nanoTime();
188
189 long end = now +
190 (timeout= 0 ? 0 :
11 matches
Mail list logo