Hi Brandon,
This point fix still bothered me so I dug a bit deeper into what the
code does (as complex and convoluted as it is). I wanted to compare the
cases of 0.0 and 1.0 to see why they differed and it seemed to me that
the difference was introduced way back when the FormattedFloatingDecim
Hi David. I have revised my fix for this CR. Here's a description of
the most recent changes:
1. The code fix has been moved slightly from it's original position
into a section within FormattedFloatingDecimal.java which handles
0.0* numbers.
2. The code fix no longer changes the p
Hi Brandon,
On 25/01/2012 5:03 PM, Brandon Passanisi wrote:
Hi David. Thank you for your review comments. My answers to your
questions are below:
On 1/23/2012 9:56 PM, David Holmes wrote:
More generally it is not clear to me that putting in this special case
is the right way to fix this. Thoug
Hi Brandon,
On 25/01/2012 5:03 PM, Brandon Passanisi wrote:
Hi David. Thank you for your review comments. My answers to your
questions are below:
On 1/23/2012 9:56 PM, David Holmes wrote:
More generally it is not clear to me that putting in this special case
is the right way to fix this. Thoug
Hi David. Thank you for your review comments. My answers to your
questions are below:
On 1/23/2012 9:56 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Brandon,
On 21/01/2012 4:19 AM, Brandon Passanisi wrote:
Resending again...
Hello core-libs. I was wondering of somebody could be please review the
following f
Hi Brandon,
On 21/01/2012 4:19 AM, Brandon Passanisi wrote:
Resending again...
Hello core-libs. I was wondering of somebody could be please review the
following fix for #6469160 and #7088271. The changes in the webrev fix
both bugs. Information is below:
Webrev URL: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/
As a general comment, I find a seven-digit bug id in isolation
extremely uninformative in terms of letting me know whether or not an
issue is of interest to me. For the messages I send to the list, I
always try to include the synopsis of the bugs in question in at least
one of the subject lin
