Committed as http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/3ff567ffe52a.
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 07/11/2014 20:52, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>
>> :
>> I don't much care either way, so the spec change to
>> Attributes(Attributes) is reverted, as you wish. Webrev refr
On 07/11/2014 20:52, Martin Buchholz wrote:
:
I don't much care either way, so the spec change to
Attributes(Attributes) is reverted, as you wish. Webrev refreshed.
Thanks, I think it's a better with just the update to the class description.
-Alan
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 05/11/2014 00:06, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>
>> :
>> So ... there is the question whether we are tightening the spec for
>> Attributes and its subclasses or only for Attributes.
>> Subclasses of Attribute that would change the order are likel
On 05/11/2014 00:06, Martin Buchholz wrote:
:
So ... there is the question whether we are tightening the spec for
Attributes and its subclasses or only for Attributes.
Subclasses of Attribute that would change the order are likely to be
very rare (is there a use case?) - I'm OK with those becomin
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 28/10/2014 18:09, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>
>> Xueming, I understand that getting CCC approval is a fair amount of
>> work. At your option, we could leave the spec unchanged and do
>> without CCC, given that Attributes' iteration order ha
On 28/10/2014 18:09, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Xueming, I understand that getting CCC approval is a fair amount of
work. At your option, we could leave the spec unchanged and do
without CCC, given that Attributes' iteration order has changed in
every past release. Or we could split the spec change
Martin, I can help the CCC, it is fair quick these days given this is a really
simple update,
just couple days.
-Sherman
On 10/28/2014 11:09 AM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Xueming, I understand that getting CCC approval is a fair amount of
work. At your option, we could leave the spec unchanged
Xueming, I understand that getting CCC approval is a fair amount of
work. At your option, we could leave the spec unchanged and do
without CCC, given that Attributes' iteration order has changed in
every past release. Or we could split the spec change off as a
separate improvement.
On Mon, Oct 2
[+core-libs-dev oops I forgot to cc: the first time...]
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Xueming Shen
wrote:
> On 10/27/2014 11:33 AM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>
>> Hello Xueming, Alan,
>>
>> I'd like you to do a code review.
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/
>> Attribute
