On Jun 26, 2015, at 10:04 PM, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
Hi Ivan, I'd like you to do a code review.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050091
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/LinkedList-invariant/
I would prefer if there was some text with the
(I've already committed this change...)
Paul and Ivan, I see your point, but perhaps writing a commented out
dataStructureInvariants method should be some kind of best practice, at
least for classes where we're not willing to pay the bytecode cost of
having the assertions be real code. This is
On 27.06.2015 21:54, Martin Buchholz wrote:
On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Ivan Gerasimov
ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com mailto:ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Martin!
Thank you for this cleanup!
Removal of wrong comments looks fine.
But your webrev contains commented
Hi Martin!
I agree that since the commented code only contains an assert statement,
it's unlikely to be confused with a real method.
It is helpful to have the invariants documented, so yes, it looks good.
Sincerely yours,
Ivan
On 30.06.2015 0:56, Martin Buchholz wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29,
Hi Martin!
Thank you for this cleanup!
Removal of wrong comments looks fine.
But your webrev contains commented checkInvariants() method.
Is it a leftover from debugging or something?
Sincerely yours,
Ivan
On 26.06.2015 23:04, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Hi Ivan, I'd like you to do a code review.
On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Ivan Gerasimov ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com
wrote:
Hi Martin!
Thank you for this cleanup!
Removal of wrong comments looks fine.
But your webrev contains commented checkInvariants() method.
Is it a leftover from debugging or something?
It could be used for
Hi Ivan, I'd like you to do a code review.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050091
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/LinkedList-invariant/
