+1
-phil.
On 12/7/16, 5:34 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
The patch has been updated as suggested and the existing test has been modified
to verify the changes:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8169725/webrev.02/
Thanks,
Brian
On Dec 7, 2016, at 5:09 PM, Brian Burkhalter<brian.burkhal...@oracle.com>
wrote:
I was expecting that; will update.
Thanks,
Brian
On Dec 7, 2016, at 5:03 PM, Philip Race<philip.r...@oracle.com> wrote:
Looks OK except for the same question about using 0xFFFFFFFF.
-phil.
On 12/6/16, 12:31 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
Continuing from thread [1].
Pursuant to comments from the CCC, the patch [2] has been updated. The changes
with respect to the previous version of the patch [3] are to clarify the
specification of TIFFField(TIFFTag,long) in terms of the constructor’s description
and the exceptions it throws, and to add an exception for the case of value>=
4294967296, i.e., above the range of a 32-bit unsigned int.
Once this patch is approved the CCC request may be updated.
Thanks,
Brian
[1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2016-November/007963.html
[2] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8169725/webrev.01/
[3] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8169725/webrev.00/
On Nov 23, 2016, at 8:03 AM, Philip Race<philip.r...@oracle.com> wrote:
+1
-phil
