On 12/09/2013 08:02 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
Peter,
I think you are misunderstanding this problem. This deadlock is not
related to the formatter synchronization, we can make
CustomerFormatter.format not synchronized and not call super.format,
the deadlock still happens.
I'm not saying that
On Dec 6, 2013, at 8:59 PM, Mike Duigou mike.dui...@oracle.com wrote:
Hello all;
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8029696
Michael McMahon noticed that some links to the anchor #NonInterference were
not using the correct name for the anchor. He prepared a patch which I
On 12/09/2013 09:28 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 08:02 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
Peter,
I think you are misunderstanding this problem. This deadlock is not
related to the formatter synchronization, we can make
CustomerFormatter.format not synchronized and not call super.format,
the
On 12/9/2013 4:28 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 08:02 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
Peter,
I think you are misunderstanding this problem. This deadlock is not
related to the formatter synchronization, we can make
CustomerFormatter.format not synchronized and not call super.format,
the
On 12/09/2013 09:51 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
On 12/9/2013 4:28 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 08:02 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
Peter,
I think you are misunderstanding this problem. This deadlock is not
related to the formatter synchronization, we can make
CustomerFormatter.format not
On 12/9/2013 4:40 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 09:28 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 08:02 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
Peter,
I think you are misunderstanding this problem. This deadlock is not
related to the formatter synchronization, we can make
CustomerFormatter.format not
On 12/9/13 9:58 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 09:51 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
On 12/9/2013 4:28 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 08:02 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
Peter,
I think you are misunderstanding this problem. This deadlock is not
related to the formatter synchronization, we
Hi Peter,
I had a look at your later webrev 03 and it looks like a good
solution to fix the issue. I am glad to see the sealed
variable removed.
About using lambda I don't know whether we have guidelines
for that - in this case it certainly makes the code more
concise. It is good to remember
On 12/09/2013 10:50 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
On 12/9/2013 4:40 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 09:28 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 08:02 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
Peter,
I think you are misunderstanding this problem. This deadlock is not
related to the formatter
Changeset: 9e579a2329c0
Author:michaelm
Date: 2013-12-09 13:05 +
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/9e579a2329c0
8029354: URLPermission.init throws llegalArgumentException: Invalid
characters in hostname
Reviewed-by: alanb, chegar
!
On 12/09/2013 11:12 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 12/9/13 9:58 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 09:51 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
On 12/9/2013 4:28 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 08:02 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
Peter,
I think you are misunderstanding this problem. This deadlock is not
Anybody wants to look at this logging issue I reported several months ago?
Le 27 juin 2013 11:57, Laurent Bourgès bourges.laur...@gmail.com a
écrit :
Dear members,
I have a problem within an external library using one JVM Shutdown hook
to perform resource cleanup (socket, lock file deletion
Given that this issue has existed (and been known) since 1.4, I doubt
anyone is particularly inclined to fix it. The most common workaround I
know of is to simply use or create a LogManager that implements reset()
as a no-op. Just subclassing the built-in LogManager is sufficient to
do this.
Changeset: 5bf0af735c61
Author:vromero
Date: 2013-12-09 19:29 +
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/langtools/rev/5bf0af735c61
8029569: internal javac cast exception when resolving varargs ambiguity
Reviewed-by: jjg
! src/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/comp/Resolve.java
On 09/12/2013 17:59, Laurent Bourgès wrote:
Anybody wants to look at this logging issue I reported several months ago?
Your previous mail mentioned 9005822, this seems to be an incident
submitted to Java Web Start rather than java.util.logging.
I couldn't a specific bug on the topic so I've
Hi David/Martin a gentle reminder for review.
--
Thanks
kalyan
Ph: (408)-585-8040
On 12/2/13, 11:21 AM, srikalyan wrote:
Hi David, Thanks for the review, the new webrev is hosted at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cl/host_for_kal/6772009-CancelledLockLoop/
. Please see inline text.
On
Hi all, a gentle reminder for review.
--
Thanks
kalyan
Ph: (408)-585-8040
On 12/2/13, 6:39 PM, srikalyan chandrashekar wrote:
Hi all, I am working on bug JDK-6963118
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6963118 .
Root Cause:
- Sensitive timing dependency between events in Main and
Changeset: 23a7524d930c
Author:mfang
Date: 2013-12-09 15:01 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/23a7524d930c
8025974: l10n for policytool
Reviewed-by: naoto, leifs, yhuang
! src/share/classes/sun/security/tools/policytool/Resources_de.java
!
On Dec 9 2013, at 11:49 , Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Mike Duigou mike.dui...@oracle.com wrote:
@apiNote : Non-normative notes about the API. Usually used for examples.
@implSpec : Describes required behaviour of conforming implementations.
I write a MappedFile ,and a task call sync write to disk.
but occur :
java.io.IOException: Cannot allocate memory
at java.nio.MappedByteBuffer.force0(Native Method)
at java.nio.MappedByteBuffer.force(MappedByteBuffer.java:154)
the os is Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.4
java
On Dec 9 2013, at 17:50 , Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
Current ConcurrentMap.forEach
http://gee.cs.oswego.edu/dl/concurrent/dist/docs/java/util/concurrent/ConcurrentMap.html#replaceAll-java.util.function.BiFunction-
has two different specs for the default method:
On 12/8/2013 11:19 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
H Mandy,
I created an issue for it nevertheless:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8029781
You're right, doPrivileged() is a more straight-forward approach than
'sealed' variable. Since this might only be considered for inclusion
in JDK9
On 12/9/2013 8:04 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 10:50 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
On 12/9/2013 4:40 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 09:28 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 08:02 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
Peter,
I think you are misunderstanding this problem. This deadlock is
On 12/9/2013 10:01 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 11:12 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 12/9/13 9:58 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 09:51 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
On 12/9/2013 4:28 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 12/09/2013 08:02 AM, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
Peter,
I think you are
24 matches
Mail list logo
