+1
On 22/10/2019 4:03 am, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2019-10-21 19:58, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Just to confirm: Is the patch
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aivanov/8232624/webrev.00/
approved?
Ship it!
/Claes
Hi David, Claes, Alan,
Thank you for your reviews!
Just to confirm: Is the patch
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aivanov/8232624/webrev.00/
approved?
The cleanup to avoid indirection for calling JNU_NewStringPLatform will
be addressed in the follow-up issue
On 2019-10-21 19:58, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Just to confirm: Is the patch
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aivanov/8232624/webrev.00/
approved?
Ship it!
/Claes
Hi David,
On 21/10/2019 14:00, David Holmes wrote:
On 21/10/2019 10:14 pm, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hi David,
On 21/10/2019 02:19, David Holmes wrote:
So what would happen if we drop the JNICALL from JNU_NewStringPLatform?
Yes, it will be found by its undecorated name too.
But I'd rather
I have filed
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232724
"Remove indirection with calling JNU_NewStringPlatform"
On 21/10/2019 13:49, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2019-10-21 14:14, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Probably, Claes thought "NewStringPlatform" wasn't used. Yet it
proved that
On 21/10/2019 10:14 pm, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hi David,
On 21/10/2019 02:19, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Alexey,
On 21/10/2019 9:37 am, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hi David,
On 20/10/2019 23:59, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Alexey,
On 21/10/2019 2:20 am, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hello,
Please review the
On 2019-10-21 14:14, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Probably, Claes thought "NewStringPlatform" wasn't used. Yet it proved
that "NewStringPlatform" is still used.
If required, I can create a follow-up issue to re-do the cleanup as Alan
suggested.
Yes, please. If some or even just one platform needs
Hi David,
On 21/10/2019 02:19, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Alexey,
On 21/10/2019 9:37 am, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hi David,
On 20/10/2019 23:59, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Alexey,
On 21/10/2019 2:20 am, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hello,
Please review the following fix which it brings back
On 21/10/2019 00:37, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Yes, JNICALL affects 32-bit Windows only. And this is exactly why
"JNU_NewStringPLatform" cannot be found by its name on 32-bit Windows;
"NewStringPlatform" is not declared as JNICALL and it can be found by
its undecorated name on 32-bit Windows and
Hi Alexey,
On 21/10/2019 9:37 am, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hi David,
On 20/10/2019 23:59, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Alexey,
On 21/10/2019 2:20 am, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hello,
Please review the following fix which it brings back
NewStringPlatform alias for JNU_NewStringPlatform. Without it, 32
Hi David,
On 20/10/2019 23:59, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Alexey,
On 21/10/2019 2:20 am, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hello,
Please review the following fix which it brings back
NewStringPlatform alias for JNU_NewStringPlatform. Without it, 32 bit
Windows build of Java does not work.
bug:
Hi Alexey,
On 21/10/2019 2:20 am, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hello,
Please review the following fix which it brings back NewStringPlatform
alias for JNU_NewStringPlatform. Without it, 32 bit Windows build of
Java does not work.
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232624
webrev:
On 20/10/2019 17:20, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
Hello,
Please review the following fix which it brings back NewStringPlatform
alias for JNU_NewStringPlatform. Without it, 32 bit Windows build of
Java does not work.
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232624
webrev:
Hello,
Please review the following fix which it brings back NewStringPlatform
alias for JNU_NewStringPlatform. Without it, 32 bit Windows build of
Java does not work.
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232624
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aivanov/8232624/webrev.00/
--
14 matches
Mail list logo
