On 05/12/2011 02:52, David Holmes wrote:
Thanks Chris and Doug et al. These fixups look good to me too.
One minor nit:
src/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/atomic/AtomicLong.java
The javadoc changes on longValue() changed actual text not just
formatting. It changes it to be consistent with o
Thanks Chris and Doug et al. These fixups look good to me too.
One minor nit:
src/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/atomic/AtomicLong.java
The javadoc changes on longValue() changed actual text not just
formatting. It changes it to be consistent with other methods, but is a
change none-the-l
On 12/ 2/11 04:22 PM, Doug Lea wrote:
We just went through these and others, and believe that everything
is now warning free.
Thanks Doug, Wow you guys are quick!
I pulled in these specific changes (atomic) and updated the webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/7117360/webrev.01/web
On 12/02/11 09:25, Chris Hegarty wrote:
Cleanup compiler warnings in the java.util.concurrent.atomic package.
This is a sync up with the raw type warning fixes in Doug's CVS, along with some
minor style cleanup.
With this change there are still 2 outstanding unchecked casts in
AtomicReferenceAr
Oh,
AtomicBoolean.java and AtomicReference.java show no differences in the
webrev, but there is a correction to the indentation in the static
initializer.
And just to point out, along with raw type warning fixes there is a
removal of a redundant cast ;-)
-Chris.
On 02/12/2011 14:25, Chris
Cleanup compiler warnings in the java.util.concurrent.atomic package.
This is a sync up with the raw type warning fixes in Doug's CVS, along
with some minor style cleanup.
With this change there are still 2 outstanding unchecked casts in
AtomicReferenceArray and AtomicReferenceFieldUpdater. W
