> Please review several fixes and improvements to the `this-escape` lint
> warning analyzer.
>
> The goal here is to apply some relatively simple logical fixes that improve
> the precision and accuracy of the analyzer, and capture the remaining
> low-hanging fruit so we can consider the
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 17:25:54 GMT, Sergey Chernyshev
wrote:
> There are two distinct approaches to parsing IPv4 literal addresses. One is
> the Java baseline "strict" syntax (all-decimal d.d.d.d form family), another
> one is the "loose" syntax of RFC 6943 section 3.1.1 [1] (POSIX `inet_addr`
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 17:25:54 GMT, Sergey Chernyshev
wrote:
> There are two distinct approaches to parsing IPv4 literal addresses. One is
> the Java baseline "strict" syntax (all-decimal d.d.d.d form family), another
> one is the "loose" syntax of RFC 6943 section 3.1.1 [1] (POSIX `inet_addr`
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 15:34:11 GMT, Darragh Clarke wrote:
>> Currently this test occasionally doesn't cleanup between runs, sometimes not
>> stopping the server or leaving Streams open
>>
>> Changes:
>> - Use try-with-resources to ensure streams close.
>> - Use try-finally to make sure the server
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 15:34:11 GMT, Darragh Clarke wrote:
>> Currently this test occasionally doesn't cleanup between runs, sometimes not
>> stopping the server or leaving Streams open
>>
>> Changes:
>> - Use try-with-resources to ensure streams close.
>> - Use try-finally to make sure the server
On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 01:43:31 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Can I please get a review of this doc-only changes to java.net.ServerSocket
>> and java.net.Socket classes?
>>
>> As noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329745, these classes
>> currently refer to the legacy
On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 07:31:47 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this doc-only changes to java.net.ServerSocket
> and java.net.Socket classes?
>
> As noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329745, these classes
> currently refer to the legacy `java.net.SocketOptions`
On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 01:43:31 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Can I please get a review of this doc-only changes to java.net.ServerSocket
>> and java.net.Socket classes?
>>
>> As noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329745, these classes
>> currently refer to the legacy
On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 07:54:19 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> @jaikiran the only reservation I have is that the new wording makes it look
> like the default implementation of `ServerSocket` methods is going to call
> `SocketImpl::getOption(SocketOption<>)` while in fact it still calls
>
On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 01:43:31 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Can I please get a review of this doc-only changes to java.net.ServerSocket
>> and java.net.Socket classes?
>>
>> As noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329745, these classes
>> currently refer to the legacy
10 matches
Mail list logo
