Hi Aleksej,
You may also consider using a golden/expected output file to be compared
with the output. It makes a test more readable (easily see what's
expected), easier to maintain with a separated golden file than multiple
literal strings in the test, and technically simpler logic (e.g.
On 21/04/2015 1:24 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 20/04/15 16:17, Lance Andersen wrote:
Hi Pavel,
So we are just documenting/clarifying the current behavior from what I
can tell from the change?
Looking at the testcase, it passes with the current JDK 9 ( and 8 ), so
this is just documenting
Hi Aleksej,
The updates to the test seem reasonable.
Best
Lance
On Apr 20, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Aleksej Efimov aleksej.efi...@oracle.com wrote:
Hello,
The JDK9 schemagen tool hadn't preserved order of the enum values [1] and it
was fixed in standalone project and was synced to JDK as part of
Hi Roger,
I am not sure you have the @implSpec/@implNote quite correct on the new methods
of Process.
For example, for Process.toHandle i would expect something like:
...
@implSpec
This implementation throws an instance of UnsupportedOperationException and
performs no other action.
Hi Remi,
I was gonna propose the same trick you mentioned in your last email :-)
Similar tricks are possible for other cases like an equivalent of the recently
added ifPresentOrElse, but that was considered a little obtuse.
On Apr 17, 2015, at 11:37 PM, Remi Forax fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
Adding in net-dev.
On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 14:02 +0200, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
Hi,
Could I please get a review and a sponsor for the following patch?
The issue is that JDK's internal /etc/resolv.conf nameserver parsing
does not properly account for IPv6 addresses on Linux/Unix. While the
Hi,
Could I please get a review and a sponsor for the following patch?
The issue is that JDK's internal /etc/resolv.conf nameserver parsing
does not properly account for IPv6 addresses on Linux/Unix. While the
code in com.sun.jndi.dns.DnsClient seems to support IPv6 addresses
passed in via the
Looks good to me.
/Erik
On 2015-04-17 14:52, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
With JDK-8074096, the number of warnings in the product was reduced to
a minimum. This enables the next step, which is turning on the
respective compiler flags that turns warnings into errors. In the long
run, this is the
On 04/20/2015 01:39 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi Remi,
I was gonna propose the same trick you mentioned in your last email :-)
yes, it's the same as
optional.map(Stream::of).orElseGet(() - Stream.empty())
(I use orElseGet() because Stream.empty() is not a constant !).
Similar tricks are
Thanks!
On 20.04.2015 18:10, Lance Andersen wrote:
Looks fine. Need to get this into the upstream project though so they
are not lost on the next update
Best
Lance
On Apr 20, 2015, at 11:01 AM, alexander stepanov
alexander.v.stepa...@oracle.com
mailto:alexander.v.stepa...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
Could you please review my change for JDK-8029689
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8029689/webrev.00/
---
There is a long-standing issue when platform implementations of java.io.Reader
throw
Hello,
Could you please review the fix
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~avstepan/8038764/webrev.00/
for the following bug:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8038764
Just a minor HTML markup fix (few 'trimming empty p' warnings fixed).
Probably the code affected is an upstream.
Regards,
Hello,
The JDK9 schemagen tool hadn't preserved order of the enum values [1]
and it was fixed in standalone project and was synced to JDK as part of
JAXWS integration [2].
Can I have a review for the
'test/javax/xml/ws/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java' test update [3] to
include test case for
On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 12:24 -0400, Andrew Hughes wrote:
- Original Message -
Adding in net-dev.
On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 14:02 +0200, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
Hi,
Could I please get a review and a sponsor for the following patch?
The issue is that JDK's internal
Hi Paul,
There are statements in Process about the specified behavior of Processes
created by ProcessBuilder. That's why I included them in the @implSpec
clause.
If @implSpec is only for the specifics of the method itself then where
should the behavior of ProcessBuilder created instances be
ok, thanks, roger
On 4/20/2015 11:57 AM, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
Hi Roger,
thanks!
Maybe better:
When using ProcessHandles avoid assumptions about the state or
liveness of the underlying process.
- When using ProcessHandles avoid assumptions about liveness or
identity of the underlying
On 20/04/15 16:17, Lance Andersen wrote:
Hi Pavel,
So we are just documenting/clarifying the current behavior from what I can tell
from the change?
Looking at the testcase, it passes with the current JDK 9 ( and 8 ), so
this is just documenting existing behavior.
If so, this looks OK
Hi Roger,
thanks!
Maybe better:
When using ProcessHandles avoid assumptions about the state or liveness of
the underlying process.
- When using ProcessHandles avoid assumptions about liveness or identity
of the underlying process.
Regards, Thomas
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Roger Riggs
On Apr 20, 2015, at 5:49 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
On 4/20/2015 9:01 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi Roger,
I am not sure you have the @implSpec/@implNote quite correct on the new
methods of Process.
For example, for Process.toHandle i would expect something
On 20/04/2015 16:01, alexander stepanov wrote:
Hello,
Could you please review the fix
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~avstepan/8038764/webrev.00/
for the following bug:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8038764
Just a minor HTML markup fix (few 'trimming empty p' warnings fixed).
Probably
Hi Pavel,
So we are just documenting/clarifying the current behavior from what I can tell
from the change? If so, this looks OK assuming you have an approved CCC? The
test seems fine.
I am assuming there should not be any issues here but would be good to hear
from others on this change as
Hi Paul,
On 4/20/2015 9:01 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi Roger,
I am not sure you have the @implSpec/@implNote quite correct on the new methods
of Process.
For example, for Process.toHandle i would expect something like:
...
@implSpec
This implementation throws an instance of
Hi Thomas,
I expanded the ProcessHandle class javadoc [1] paragraph to include the
caution about process id reuse.
Thanks, Roger
[1]
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/ph-apidraft/java/lang/ProcessHandle.html
On 4/18/2015 2:44 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
Hi Roger,
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 8:57
- Original Message -
Adding in net-dev.
On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 14:02 +0200, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
Hi,
Could I please get a review and a sponsor for the following patch?
The issue is that JDK's internal /etc/resolv.conf nameserver parsing
does not properly account for IPv6
On Apr 20, 2015, at 7:33 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
There are statements in Process about the specified behavior of Processes
created by ProcessBuilder. That's why I included them in the @implSpec
clause.
If @implSpec is only for the specifics of the method
Hi Paul,
On 4/20/2015 2:26 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Apr 20, 2015, at 7:33 PM, Roger Riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Paul,
There are statements in Process about the specified behavior of Processes
created by ProcessBuilder. That's why I included them in the @implSpec clause.
If
26 matches
Mail list logo
