Re: JDK 9 RFR(m): 8177788 migrate collections docs into jdk doc-files

On 4/5/17 5:54 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: On Apr 5, 2017, at 5:44 PM, Stuart Marks wrote: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smarks/reviews/8177788/webrev.0/ Other than designfaq.html, these html files such as changes[3-9].html, index.html, overview.html, and reference.html seem not worthing to be r

Re: JDK 9 RFR(m): 8177788 migrate collections docs into jdk doc-files

> On Apr 5, 2017, at 5:44 PM, Stuart Marks wrote: > > Hi all, > > Here's another step in the docs cleanup: migration of the collections > technotes/guides into the JDK's javadoc doc-files. This is a webrev > containing two changesets: > > JDK-8177787 copy collections technotes/guides html fi

JDK 9 RFR(m): 8177788 migrate collections docs into jdk doc-files

Hi all, Here's another step in the docs cleanup: migration of the collections technotes/guides into the JDK's javadoc doc-files. This is a webrev containing two changesets: JDK-8177787 copy collections technotes/guides html files into jdk doc-files JDK-8177788 fix links, minor editing, add Ja

Re: RFR 9: 8165641 : Deprecate Object.finalize

(I would not have deprecated finalize; I don't think we have a good enough answer for what to use instead. But) Looks good. Typo: an finalizable object

Re: RFR 9: 8165641 : Deprecate Object.finalize

> On Apr 3, 2017, at 7:44 AM, Roger Riggs wrote: > > [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-finalize-deprecate-8165641 Typo: s/an finalizable/a finalizable/ + * The {@code finalize} method might be called on an finalizable object Otherwise, looks good. No need for a new webrev.

Re: [8u] RFR: 8177776: Create an equivalent test case for JDK9's SupplementalJapaneseEraTest

I revised the test case not to rely on shell script. Please review. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~naoto/816/webrev.01/ Naoto On 3/30/17 2:10 PM, Naoto Sato wrote: Hello, Please review the changes to the following issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-816 The proposed change

Re: JDK 9 RFR(s): JDK-8065825: Make the java -help consistent with the man page

On 05/04/2017 17:31, Kumar Srinivasan wrote: Ok I removed it from the main usage, yes the existing explanation for @argfile should suffice. Is the information accurate with respect to all the new module options ? I have checked them, but would help to another pair of "jigsaw" eyes on it. Sinc

Re: Java 9 and IntSummaryStatistics et al.

I can do that. I’ve done this before a couple of times, so it should be reasonably familiar. Will attempt to whip something up in the next couple of days. Thanks, Chris > On Apr 5, 2017, at 12:30 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > I logged this issue: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.n

Re: Java 9 and IntSummaryStatistics et al.

Adding a new public ctor to initialize the state to a known value seems reasonable to me. On 4/5/2017 8:57 AM, Chris Dennis wrote: Taking from this conversation that there is consensus (at least amongst those on this thread) that this is an issue that should be fixed, what should my next step

Re: JDK 9 RFR(s): 8150488: add note to Scanner.findAll() regardingpossible infinite streams

On 4/4/17 10:48 PM, Stuart Marks wrote: On 4/4/17 4:10 PM, Xueming Shen wrote: Personally I think the use scenario and the expected resulting behavior of StreamfinaAll(ptn) should be more equivalent/similar to the use case of while (s.hasNext(p)) { s.next(p); }, or while (m.find()) { }, the

Re: JDK 9 RFR(s): JDK-8065825: Make the java -help consistent with the man page

Ok I removed it from the main usage, yes the existing explanation for @argfile should suffice. Is the information accurate with respect to all the new module options ? I have checked them, but would help to another pair of "jigsaw" eyes on it. Since the L10N freeze is coming up shortly. http://c

Re: Java 9 and IntSummaryStatistics et al.

Hi Chris, I logged this issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8178117 Do you want to provide a patch? I can help guide you through the process. See here if not already familiar: http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/

Re: JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8177640: jdk/internal/util/jar/TestVersionedStream.java fails on Windows

> On 4 Apr 2017, at 22:31, Amy Lu wrote: > > Please review this test-only change. > > jdk/internal/util/jar/TestVersionedStream.java > > This test fails on Windows platforms. Test tries to create and write > something to the files (in test preparation method 'createFiles') for later > compar

Re: [9] RFR 8177969: Faster FilePermission::implies by avoiding the use of Path::relativize

Hi Max, The code looks ok. How much faster does it make FilePermission compares? I assume if it is not accepted to be fixed in JDK 9, you will push it to JDK 10. Roger On 4/3/2017 11:30 AM, Weijun Wang wrote: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~weijun/8177969/webrev.00/ This new implementation o

Re: Java 9 and IntSummaryStatistics et al.

Taking from this conversation that there is consensus (at least amongst those on this thread) that this is an issue that should be fixed, what should my next steps be in order to help move this forward? > On Mar 30, 2017, at 10:01 AM, Peter Levart wrote: > > > > On 03/30/2017 03:14 PM, Chris

Re: RFR [9] 8178101: Migrate the thread deprecation technote to javadoc doc-files

> On 5 Apr 2017, at 13:29, David Holmes wrote: > > Forgot to say, doesn't the html file need a copyright notice added before we > add it? Sure, that makes sense. The earliest reference I can find is 2005, but I’m sure that it was probably around before that! http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar

Re: RFR [9] 8178101: Migrate the thread deprecation technote to javadoc doc-files

Forgot to say, doesn't the html file need a copyright notice added before we add it? David On 5/04/2017 10:26 PM, David Holmes wrote: On 5/04/2017 7:08 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote: As part of the ongoing doc cleanup effort, we should move the existing longstanding note on "Thread Primitive Deprec

Re: RFR [9] 8178101: Migrate the thread deprecation technote to javadoc doc-files

On 5/04/2017 7:08 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote: As part of the ongoing doc cleanup effort, we should move the existing longstanding note on "Thread Primitive Deprecation" into the JDK repository, say under jdk/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/doc-files, and update the links from the Thread javado

Re: RFR [9] 8178101: Migrate the thread deprecation technote to javadoc doc-files

On 5 Apr 2017, at 13:05, Dawid Weiss wrote: > > While applying this patch, you could probably piggyback a fix to this > typo as well: > > "Cleanup would have to [be] repeated” Sure, will do. -Chris. > Dawid > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Chris Hegarty > wrote: >> As part of the ongoi

Re: RFR [9] 8178101: Migrate the thread deprecation technote to javadoc doc-files

While applying this patch, you could probably piggyback a fix to this typo as well: "Cleanup would have to [be] repeated" Dawid On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote: > As part of the ongoing doc cleanup effort, we should move the existing > longstanding note on "Thread Primitive

Re: JDK 9 RFR(s): JDK-8065825: Make the java -help consistent with the man page

On 05/04/2017 01:18, Kumar Srinivasan wrote: Hello, Please review: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ksrini/8065825/webrev.00/ This adds a few things to the java -help and some minor cleanup. Changing @ to @argument in the options list looks fine. I'm sure sure why @argument-files is being added t

RFR [9] 8178101: Migrate the thread deprecation technote to javadoc doc-files

As part of the ongoing doc cleanup effort, we should move the existing longstanding note on "Thread Primitive Deprecation" into the JDK repository, say under jdk/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/doc-files, and update the links from the Thread javadoc. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/817810