Hi,
On 2/03/2014 12:07 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
> Hi David,
>
>> 1. Generating debug symbols in the binaries (via gcc -g or whatever)
>> 2. Generating debuginfo files (zipped or not) (FDS)
>> 3. Stripping debug symbols from the binaries (strip-policy)
>>
>> It may be that we don't have clean s
Making the language Kindergarten-friendly at the cost of general
usefulness is a mistake, IMO. And anyway there's nothing that is less
safe about a Monitors class than ReentrantLock; on the other hand,
monitors continue to be considerably lighter (size and (for most of the
history of JUC) spee
HI Mike,
> - I would expect that the flow is something like an extended version of
> https://blogs.oracle.com/dbx/entry/creating_separate_debug_info :
>1. Compile source files with some form of "-g"
>2. Create separate debug files for object files.
>3. Strip object files.
>4.
Thank you Alan!
On 02.03.2014 14:50, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 02/03/2014 07:58, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
Hello!
SequenceInputStream#read functions are implemented recursively.
This may cause stack overflow in some extreme cases with lots of
empty substreams.
Would you please help review the fix?
On 02/03/2014 07:58, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
Hello!
SequenceInputStream#read functions are implemented recursively.
This may cause stack overflow in some extreme cases with lots of empty
substreams.
Would you please help review the fix?
BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/7011804
WEBR
Thank you Chris!
On 02.03.2014 12:37, Chris Hegarty wrote:
The source changes look ok to me, but I can't imagine that anyone would run
into this under normal circumstances.
Quite trivially, I don't think the test needs to be run under othervm,
especially with a fixed JDK.
It was meant to be
With a curious 9 months old crawling around the house, I've just moved
the sharp knives to the top draw in the kitchen - out of reach. I don't
think we should be encouraging people to use monitor.tryLock() for
various reasons:
1. We have a richer interface with Lock/ReentrantLock, including b
The source changes look ok to me, but I can't imagine that anyone would run
into this under normal circumstances.
Quite trivially, I don't think the test needs to be run under othervm,
especially with a fixed JDK.
-Chris.
> On 2 Mar 2014, at 07:58, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> Seque
