On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 17:02:57 GMT, Alex Blewitt
wrote:
>> Sonar displays a warning message that modifiers should be declared in the
>> order listed in the JLS; specifically, that isntead of using `final static`
>> the `static final` should be preferred.
>>
>> This fixes the issues in the
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 17:06:04 GMT, Alex Blewitt
wrote:
>>> If I have other fixes for different modules, should I file PRs with the
>>> same bug number e.g. "8263658: Use the blessed modifier order in
>>> java.logging/java.desktop" or should we have separate bug numbers for them?
>>
>>
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 17:03:28 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> If I have other fixes for different modules, should I file PRs with the same
>> bug number e.g. "8263658: Use the blessed modifier order in
>> java.logging/java.desktop" or should we have separate bug numbers for them?
>
>> If I have
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 16:51:35 GMT, Alex Blewitt
wrote:
> If I have other fixes for different modules, should I file PRs with the same
> bug number e.g. "8263658: Use the blessed modifier order in
> java.logging/java.desktop" or should we have separate bug numbers for them?
Separate bug
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 16:50:39 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> Is that there to indicate a placeholder value that was once used and is kept
>> for documentation purposes? Should the corresponding JavaDoc be removed as
>> well? Should I do this in the same commit/PR as this one, or submit a new
>>
> Sonar displays a warning message that modifiers should be declared in the
> order listed in the JLS; specifically, that isntead of using `final static`
> the `static final` should be preferred.
>
> This fixes the issues in the `java.base` package for ease of reviewing.
>
>
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 14:50:43 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> Sonar displays a warning message that modifiers should be declared in the
>> order listed in the JLS; specifically, that isntead of using `final static`
>> the `static final` should be preferred.
>>
>> This fixes the issues in the
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 16:42:39 GMT, Alex Blewitt
wrote:
>> Yeah, I agree.
>
> Is that there to indicate a placeholder value that was once used and is kept
> for documentation purposes? Should the corresponding JavaDoc be removed as
> well? Should I do this in the same commit/PR as this one, or
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 15:08:09 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/com/sun/security/ntlm/NTLMException.java line 52:
>>
>>> 50: * from server.
>>> 51: */
>>> 52: //public static final int DOMAIN_UNMATCH = 3;
>>
>> Maybe this one ought to be removed instead?
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:41:21 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Thanks for making these changes. This is much easier to review now. I'm not
>> an expert with JNI ref - but the logic now looks right.
>
> Please hold off on this; there's an issue to clear up.
@theRealAph Please let me know when this PR
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 12:31:22 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> Sonar displays a warning message that modifiers should be declared in the
>> order listed in the JLS; specifically, that isntead of using `final static`
>> the `static final` should be preferred.
>>
>> This fixes the issues in the
As per the Java Native Interface Specification: "All Java objects returned by
JNI functions are local references." [1].
The get/set-InetXXAddress-member helper functions in net_util.c retrieve a
local reference to the internal `holder` before operating on the InetAddress
object. These
On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 22:45:30 GMT, Alex Blewitt
wrote:
> Sonar displays a warning message that modifiers should be declared in the
> order listed in the JLS; specifically, that isntead of using `final static`
> the `static final` should be preferred.
>
> This fixes the issues in the
> Hi,
>
> The fix for the reported bug in Utils.CONTEXT_RESTRICTED caused a couple of
> regression failures, which turned out to be another bug exposed by this fix
> where HTTP/1.1 CONNECT requests with authentication were filtering out proxy
> authentication headers wrongly. This was because
14 matches
Mail list logo
