Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources?

Hi Kris, On 3/09/2016 12:41 PM, Krystal Mok wrote: Hi core-libs developers, I mostly live down in the VM world, but recently I've been playing with j.u.c.locks a bit, and saw that there's an opportunity to retrofit the API with the try-with-resources syntax. I wonder if anybody has brought this

Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources?

Hi David, Thanks for the link! I'd reckon it's been brought up before, but I guess I didn't use the right keywords to get a good search. That's good enough history for me. It explains every issue I've thought about. The new Java 9 TWR syntax is still fairly limited, in that it still doesn't suppo

Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources?

Hi Krystal! On 03.09.2016 5:41, Krystal Mok wrote: Hi core-libs developers, I mostly live down in the VM world, but recently I've been playing with j.u.c.locks a bit, and saw that there's an opportunity to retrofit the API with the try-with-resources syntax. I wonder if anybody has brought this

Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources?

- Mail original - > De: "Ivan Gerasimov" > À: "Krystal Mok" , "core-libs-dev" > > Envoyé: Samedi 3 Septembre 2016 12:23:28 > Objet: Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources? > Hi Krystal! > > On 03.09.2016 5:41, Krystal Mok wrote: >> Hi core-libs developers, >> >> I m

Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources?

On Friday, September 2, 2016, Krystal Mok wrote: > Hi Vitaly, > > Thanks for your comments! > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 7:55 PM, Vitaly Davidovich > wrote: > >> Hi Kris, >> >> >> On Friday, September 2, 2016, Krystal Mok > > wrote: >> >>> Hi core-libs developers, >>> >>> I mostly live down in the

Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources?

On 9/3/2016 12:27 AM, Krystal Mok wrote: Hi David, Thanks for the link! I'd reckon it's been brought up before, but I guess I didn't use the right keywords to get a good search. That's good enough history for me. It explains every issue I've thought about. The new Java 9 TWR syntax is still fai

Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources?

> De: "Dr Heinz M. Kabutz" > À: "Remi Forax" > Cc: "Ivan Gerasimov" , "core-libs-dev" > > Envoyé: Samedi 3 Septembre 2016 19:10:19 > Objet: Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources? > Not sure why the discussion keeps on going to EA with try-with-resource with > locks. > 1. T

Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources?

On Saturday, September 3, 2016, wrote: > > De: "Dr Heinz M. Kabutz" > > > À: "Remi Forax" > > > Cc: "Ivan Gerasimov" >, > "core-libs-dev" > > > > > Envoyé: Samedi 3 Septembre 2016 19:10:19 > > Objet: Re: A bit of sugar for j.u.c.locks with try-with-resources? > > > Not sure why the discussion kee

Re: RFR: JDK-8161230 ClassLoader: add resource methods returning java.util.stream.Stream

Hi Mandy, The current changes can be found here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~reinhapa/reviews/8161230/webrev.02 On 02.09.2016 23:11, Mandy Chung wrote: >> On Sep 2, 2016, at 2:50 AM, Patrick Reinhart wrote: >> >> Updated the existing >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~reinhapa/reviews/8161230/web

Re: RFR 8164691 Stream specification clarifications for iterate and collect

Hi Paul, there's a small copy & paste error in the code samples in Double/Int/LongStream#iterate() Example DoubleStream#iterate: * {@code * for (T index=seed; hasNext.test(index); index = next.apply(index)) { * ... * } * } That should be * for