On 8.10.2015 13:49, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
Please, review the following change
Issue : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7199353
Round 2 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/7199353/webrev.01
Changes against round 1:
* @javax.management.ConstructorProperties (was
@javax.ma
On 14/10/2015 10:34, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
Round 2 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/7199353/webrev.01
Changes against round 1:
* @javax.management.ConstructorProperties (was
@javax.management.annotation.ConstructorProperties)
* diff is against the current jdk9 (eg. not the
On 14.10.2015 15:24, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 14/10/2015 10:34, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
Round 2 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/7199353/webrev.01
Changes against round 1:
* @javax.management.ConstructorProperties (was
@javax.management.annotation.ConstructorProperties)
* diff i
On 14/10/2015 14:38, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
Eg. "When only @java.beans.ConstructorProperties is used then rule 2
is not applicable to subset Profiles of Java SE that do not include
the java.beans package." ?
Adding "only" will would work too. You might consider "is present"
rather than "i
> On Oct 14, 2015, at 7:25 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>
>> Hm, shouldn't we name the new annotation differently then?
>> @ConstructorMapping ? It is not mandatory that we keep the actual name - we
>> are changing the package anyway ...
> This may have been discussed previously, Mandy might know.
> On Oct 14, 2015, at 2:36 AM, Jaroslav Bachorik
> wrote:
>
> On 8.10.2015 13:49, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
>> Please, review the following change
>>
>> Issue : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7199353
>
> Round 2 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/7199353/webrev.01
That lo
On 14.10.2015 16:52, Mandy Chung wrote:
On Oct 14, 2015, at 7:25 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
Hm, shouldn't we name the new annotation differently then? @ConstructorMapping
? It is not mandatory that we keep the actual name - we are changing the
package anyway ...
This may have been discussed
On 10/13/2015 03:50 PM, Keimpe Bronkhorst wrote:
I have a custom JavaFileManager used for JSR199 compilations, but when
I use the -release option I see:
Error: -release option specified, but the provided JavaFileManager is
not a StandardJavaFileManager..
This basically forces everybody to im
Hi
I'm looking for an up to date syntax documentation for the
module-info.java. Specifically I'm looking for the syntax for optional
dependencies and specifying the main class. The most up to date
information I could find was [1] but this doesn't cover optional
dependencies. Googling suggests
On 14/10/2015 17:14, Philippe Marschall wrote:
Hi
I'm looking for an up to date syntax documentation for the
module-info.java. Specifically I'm looking for the syntax for optional
dependencies and specifying the main class. The most up to date
information I could find was [1] but this doesn't
Changeset: 3c022633643d
Author:jiangli
Date: 2015-10-13 16:39 -0400
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/hotspot/rev/3c022633643d
Fix app class dump failure with -Xbootclasspath/a.
! src/share/vm/classfile/classLoader.cpp
! src/share/vm/classfile/classLoader.hpp
Changeset: 4fadf68d6d63
Author:gtriantafill
Date: 2015-10-13 15:39 -0400
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/hotspot/rev/4fadf68d6d63
Fix Observability tests
Reviewed-by: lfoltan, hseigel, ctornqvi
+ test/runtime/modules/Visibility/XbootcpVisibility.java
- test/runtime/modu
Based on the feedback from Alan, I'm withdrawing the nomination.
Thanks,
Christian
-Original Message-
From: jigsaw-dev [mailto:jigsaw-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of
Christian Tornqvist
Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2015 2:14 PM
To: jigsaw-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: CFV: New Jig
13 matches
Mail list logo
