On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 09:21 +0200, Nils Loodin wrote: > Ah, you're right, i forgot the samples directory. And as for the text > being in each source file, that's how I undestood the requirement from > Aurelio after some email conversation. Looping him in and he might shed > some light on it.
I'm sorry to moan about this - but please post the details behind the requirement. Unilateral and undocumented changes are not useful to people outside Oracle. Discussions should happen on the mailing list not off it. > > As I understood > > On 08/11/2011 05:58 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > Nils Loodin wrote: > >> Added a comment in each demo source file stating that the code below > >> is unfit for production. > >> Made a separate comment blog from the copyright one to make it stand > >> out more and be more warning-like :) > >> > >> > >> > >> /Nisse > >> > > Nils - is it just demo code or do you plan to do this to sample code > > too (sample code is in src/share/sample/**)? One thing that isn't > > clear to me is why this needs to be added to every file. Seems like a > > warning in each demo's README should be sufficient. > > > > One specific file in the webrev that might need special treatment is > > hprof_b_spec.h. That header file is essentially the "spec" to the > > HPROF binary format (sad I know). It just seems a bit strange to add a > > comment saying that it "has been deliberately simplified" to this file > > specifically. > > > > -Alan. >
