On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Jeff Hain jeffh...@rocketmail.com wrote:
Chris wrote:
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8060052/webrev.00/webrev/
An aside remark:
Every time some nanos timeout needs to be kept track of, and that
remaining time does not need to be returned,
Hi XML experts,
Can I humbly ask to review this simple fix.
Thank you,
Aleksej
On 08.10.2014 13:09, Aleksej Efimov wrote:
Hello,
Please, review the fix [1] for the 8046817 [2].
Problem: schemagen tool doesn't generate schema file for the enum
types [3].
SchemaGenerator class gets a list of
Gently reminder
Please, review this test bug fix backport
-Konstantin
On 13.10.2014 18:24, Konstantin Shefov wrote:
On 10.10.2014 13:06, Konstantin Shefov wrote:
Hello,
Please review and approve the backport of the test bug fix to 8u40
The bug:
On Oct 14, 2014, at 10:26 AM, Konstantin Shefov konstantin.she...@oracle.com
wrote:
Gently reminder
Please, review
+1
Paul.
-Konstantin
On 13.10.2014 19:04, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
Looks good (not a Reviewer).
Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov
On 10/13/14, 6:22 PM, Konstantin
Hi,
Following a feedback from Alan - I dropped 'SecurityException'
from the throws clause of the new constructor - keeping
only the @throws in the API documentation.
Here is the new webrev (the above is the only change compared
to the previous webrev.01).
Hello,
Please review the test bug fix
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059070
Webrev is http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8059070/webrev.00/
Thanks
-Konstantin
OK, so what I will do for now is I exclude these 4 files and push without them.
I'll create a new issue to add them later.
-Pavel
On 14 Oct 2014, at 14:44, Alan Bateman alan.bate...@oracle.com wrote:
On 14/10/2014 14:34, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Hi Pavel,
I saw your mail on build-dev.
I guess
On 14 Oct 2014, at 15:03, Pavel Rappo pavel.ra...@oracle.com wrote:
OK, so what I will do for now is I exclude these 4 files and push without
them. I'll create a new issue to add them later.
That sounds like a fine plan. This issue has already gone on for long enough,
and I don’t think that
On 14/10/14 16:09, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 14 Oct 2014, at 15:03, Pavel Rappo pavel.ra...@oracle.com wrote:
OK, so what I will do for now is I exclude these 4 files and push without them.
I'll create a new issue to add them later.
That sounds like a fine plan. This issue has already gone on
Please review the test fix.
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8060432
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~weijun/8060432/webrev.00/
This test is to test
compareJars(new JarFile(normalized.jar), new JarFile(repacked.jar));
where the jar files (normalized.jar repacked.jar and
On 14 Oct 2014, at 15:15, Daniel Fuchs daniel.fu...@oracle.com wrote:
On 14/10/14 16:09, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 14 Oct 2014, at 15:03, Pavel Rappo pavel.ra...@oracle.com wrote:
OK, so what I will do for now is I exclude these 4 files and push without
them. I'll create a new issue to add
Thanks a lot!
-Pavel
On 14 Oct 2014, at 15:33, Chris Hegarty chris.hega...@oracle.com wrote:
META-INF files in the webrev, two of which are in the wrong location. They
are directly under 'META-INF’, where they should all be under
‘META-INF/services’. This is just a note for Pavel, when he
Hi,
Please review a trivial change in String.contentEquals:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8060485
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8060485/webrev.00/
It improves the performance drastically:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8060485/perf.txt
...not to mention it improves the
Looks good to me!
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Aleksey Shipilev
aleksey.shipi...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
Please review a trivial change in String.contentEquals:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8060485
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8060485/webrev.00/
It improves the
On 14 Oct 2014, at 17:33, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
Looks good to me!
+1 'noreg-hard'
-Chris.
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Aleksey Shipilev
aleksey.shipi...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
Please review a trivial change in String.contentEquals:
Hi,
This is an unrelated issue, yet is there any reason for the inner loop of
equals to be written in such a (confusing) way?
if (n == anotherString.value.length) {
char v1[] = value;
char v2[] = anotherString.value;
int i = 0;
Thanks guys!
And of course, I managed to do two minor mistakes in a two-line change:
the indentation is a bit wrong, and cast to String is redundant. Here is
the updated webrev and the changeset (need a Sponsor!):
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8060485/webrev.01/
On 14.10.2014 19:32, Stanimir Simeonoff wrote:
Hi,
This is an unrelated issue, yet is there any reason for the inner loop
of equals to be written in such a (confusing) way?
if (n == anotherString.value.length) {
char v1[] = value;
char v2[] =
Paul,
Thanks for the feedback!
Updated version:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8059877/webrev.01/
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8059877/webrev.00/
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059877
Generally looks ok.
- MethodHandleImpl
786 if
On 14/10/2014 18:38, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
Thanks guys!
And of course, I managed to do two minor mistakes in a two-line change:
the indentation is a bit wrong, and cast to String is redundant. Here is
the updated webrev and the changeset (need a Sponsor!):
a
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:55 PM, Alan Bateman alan.bate...@oracle.com
wrote:
On 14/10/2014 18:38, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
Thanks guys!
And of course, I managed to do two minor mistakes in a two-line change:
the indentation is a bit wrong, and cast to String is redundant. Here is
the
Amy,
The modifications you have made will not test pack200 compression
and normalization correctly, as the test needs .class files. Do you know
why the test fails on windows ?
Kumar
On 10/14/2014 7:19 AM, Amy Lu wrote:
Please review the test fix.
bug:
Hi Joe
If you’re okay with the code; would you be my sponsor for this. We need move
forward and push these tests into openjdk repo.
Thank you so much
Tristan
On Aug 29, 2014, at 11:21 AM, huizhe wang huizhe.w...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Tristan,
Looks good. I left notes in the bug's comment
On 10/13/2014 5:50 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
On 10/10/2014 07:31 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 10/10/2014 8:10 AM, Claes Redestad wrote:
Hi all,
please review this patch which attempts to clean up synchronization
and improve scalability when
defining and getting java.lang.Package objects.
I
Claes, Peter,
Thanks for the revised webrev and Peter's thorough review. webrev.05
looks much better. My comment is mostly minor.
On 10/13/2014 8:41 AM, Claes Redestad wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8060130/webrev.05
ClassLoader.java
line 1582-1586 - I suggest to get rid of
On 10/13/2014 2:04 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
On 10/13/2014 04:18 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Looking at definePackage it seems both old and new code have serious
race conditions due to a lack of atomicity when checking the
parent/system packages. A package of the same name could be defined
in
On 10/15/14, 4:44 AM, Kumar Srinivasan wrote:
Amy,
The modifications you have made will not test pack200 compression
and normalization correctly, as the test needs .class files.
Sorry, I missed that.
Please review the updated version, test works on .class files
(Utils.TEST_CLS_DIR)
27 matches
Mail list logo
