RFR: JDK-8034906 Fix typos, errors and Javadoc differences in java.time

A set of minor wording fixes in Javadoc: https://gist.github.com/jodastephen/8984256 Comments welcome. Stephen

Re: RFR: JDK-8034906 Fix typos, errors and Javadoc differences in java.time

Hi Stephen, This could be construed as a spec-change, even if a typo :( - * which are too large to fit in an {@code int} and throw a {@code DateTimeException}. + * which are too large to fit in an {@code int} and throw an {@code UnsupportedTemporalTypeException}. David On 19/02/2014 8:54 PM

Re: RFR: JDK-8034906 Fix typos, errors and Javadoc differences in java.time

Could or would? Who decides... Stephen On 19 February 2014 11:08, David Holmes wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > This could be construed as a spec-change, even if a typo :( > > - * which are too large to fit in an {@code int} and throw a {@code > DateTimeException}. > + * which are too large to fit in an

Re: RFR: JDK-8034906 Fix typos, errors and Javadoc differences in java.time

On 19/02/2014 11:08, David Holmes wrote: Hi Stephen, This could be construed as a spec-change, even if a typo :( - * which are too large to fit in an {@code int} and throw a {@code DateTimeException}. + * which are too large to fit in an {@code int} and throw an {@code UnsupportedTemporalType

Re: RFR: JDK-8034906 Fix typos, errors and Javadoc differences in java.time

On 19/02/2014 9:29 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote: Could or would? Who decides... Officially I have no idea. I would think the criteria would be to consider: a) what the code actually does b) whether there is a TCK test for it Though if (b) holds then it must be that the code does what is writt

Re: RFR: JDK-8034906 Fix typos, errors and Javadoc differences in java.time

Hi Stephen! May I ask you to add some more typo fixes to your patch? Sincerely yours, Ivan diff a/src/share/classes/java/time/OffsetTime.java b/src/share/classes/java/time/OffsetTime.java - * This will result in the old and new objects representing the same instant an an implied day. +

Re: RFR: JDK-8034906 Fix typos, errors and Javadoc differences in java.time

On 19 February 2014 11:39, Alan Bateman wrote: > On 19/02/2014 11:08, David Holmes wrote: >> >> Hi Stephen, >> >> This could be construed as a spec-change, even if a typo :( >> >> - * which are too large to fit in an {@code int} and throw a {@code >> DateTimeException}. >> + * which are too large

Re: Minor com.sun.jndi.dns cleanup

On 18/02/2014 12:45, Florian Weimer wrote: Thanks for the bug number and these suggestions. The new version is here: I had to adjust the checked exceptions, so I wrapped the InvalidNameException from DnsName in a CommunicationException as w

Re: RFR: JDK-8034906 Fix typos, errors and Javadoc differences in java.time

On 19/02/2014 10:04 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote: On 19 February 2014 11:39, Alan Bateman wrote: On 19/02/2014 11:08, David Holmes wrote: Hi Stephen, This could be construed as a spec-change, even if a typo :( - * which are too large to fit in an {@code int} and throw a {@code DateTimeExcep

Re: Minor com.sun.jndi.dns cleanup

On 02/19/2014 01:05 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 18/02/2014 12:45, Florian Weimer wrote: Thanks for the bug number and these suggestions. The new version is here: I had to adjust the checked exceptions, so I wrapped the InvalidNameException fro

Re: RFR: JDK-8034906 Fix typos, errors and Javadoc differences in java.time

Patch updated: https://gist.github.com/jodastephen/8984256 with differences: https://gist.github.com/jodastephen/8984256/revisions thanks for the spots, Stephen On 19 February 2014 11:58, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hi Stephen! > > May I ask you to add some more typo fixes to your patch? > > Sincer

Re: RFR: JDK-8034906 Fix typos, errors and Javadoc differences in java.time

Hi, These would be fine for 9 but I would not backport them to 8 because they do not add significant value and do create differences between the specification and the javadoc. Any difference creates an overhead that a person has to resolve even if it turns out to be a no-op. I would update t

Re: Minor com.sun.jndi.dns cleanup

On 19/02/2014 12:56, Florian Weimer wrote: It's encoded as a bit field, like this: end of name 00xx regular label of length xx 11yy upper 6 bits of a compression reference (followed by another byte containing the lower 8 bits) 01zz used to b

Serial warnings in java.util.ArrayPrefixHelpers

Hello, The file java.util.ArrayPrefixHelpers seems to be part of the 166-alpha set of files in the JDK. There are a number of package-private static final and serializable classes in this file which neither define serialVersionUIDs nor have a @SuppressWarnings("serial") annotation. So, this

Re: Minor com.sun.jndi.dns cleanup

On 02/19/2014 06:43 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 19/02/2014 12:56, Florian Weimer wrote: It's encoded as a bit field, like this: end of name 00xx regular label of length xx 11yy upper 6 bits of a compression reference (followed by another byte contai

Re: RFR(S): 8034087: XML parser may overwrite element content if that content falls onto the border of an entity scanner buffer

On 18/02/2014 17:48, huizhe wang wrote: Looks good to me. Thanks, Joe The test looks okay to me too. -Alan.

JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8035279: Clean up internal deprecations in BigInteger

This patch concerns cleaning up some ugly internal deprecations. Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035279 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8035279/webrev.00/ All JTREG BigInteger tests pass, and the serialized form has been unaltered as verified by bidirectional read-write

[9] RFR (M): 8027827: Improve performance of catchException combinator

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8027827/final/webrev.00 https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/JDK-8027827 354 lines changed: 193 ins; 91 del; 70 mod OVERVIEW MethodHandles.catchException combinator implementation is based on generic invokers (MethodHandleImpl$GuardWithCatch.invoke_*). It is

JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8035076: Pattern$BnMS never used due to bug in Pattern$BnM.optimize

Hi, Please help codereview the change for JDK-8035076. Issue:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035076 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/8035067/webrev This is regression caused by the change we made back to jdk7 to support case insensitive match, in which a base class Slic

Re: Serial warnings in java.util.ArrayPrefixHelpers

On 2/19/2014 12:16 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: The jsr166 CVS version of this file already has serialVersionUIDs added. jsr166 CVS src/main has been jdk8/jdk9 warning-clean for a while now. Thanks for the update Martin; looking forward to the next sync to get rid of a few more warnings :-) -J

Re: RFR: JDK-8032050: TEST_BUG: java/rmi/activation/Activatable/shutdownGracefully/ShutdownGracefully.java fails intermittently

Hi Tristan, Thanks for the updates. Pushed: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d24297425fd0 It's good to see all that unnecessary thread creation stuff removed. s'marks On 2/14/14 6:53 PM, Tristan Yan wrote: Thank you Stuart This is nice. I thought two variables were weird but I di

Re: Add IDN support to existing net APIs

Hi Michael, Thanks a lot for your comments. On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Michael McMahon < michael.x.mcma...@oracle.com> wrote: > I think it's a good idea. Before changing anything though, > we would need to: > >1. identify all APIs that could potentially be affected and figure out >

Re: JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8035076: Pattern$BnMS never used due to bug in Pattern$BnM.optimize

On 2/19/2014 7:47 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: I don't see an actual test added here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/8035067/webrev/test/java/util/regex/RegExTest.java.udiff.html No act

Re: Discussion on root cause analysis of JDK-7052625 : com/sun/net/httpserver/bugs/6725892/Test.java fails intermittently

On 02/18/2014 12:51 AM, michael cui wrote: Hi, I would like to discuss my current root cause analysis of JDK-7052625 : com/sun/net/httpserver/bugs/6725892/Test.java fails intermittently As JDK-6725892 stated, the purpose of this regression