Please remove lines 157-159; otherwise, looks fine.
Thanks,
-Joe
On 04/24/2013 09:35 AM, Eric McCorkle wrote:
Any further comments, or is this one good to go?
On 04/23/13 19:54, Joseph Darcy wrote:
Acknowledged; thanks for checking,
-Joe
On 4/23/2013 7:46 AM, Eric McCorkle wrote:
I believe so. Alex Buckley recommended the exact wording.
On 04/22/13 22:09, Joseph Darcy wrote:
Hello,
240 * Returns the number of formal parameters (whether explicitly
241 * declared or implicitly declared or neither) for the
executable
Are there parameters that are neither explicitly nor implicitly
declared?
I still think the follow comment is better deleted given the source that
follows it:
157 // If a parameter has no name, return argX, where x is the
158 // index.
159 //
-Joe
On 4/22/2013 11:46 AM, Eric McCorkle wrote:
I have posted a newer version with some more edits. Please review and
suggest any further changes.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~emc/8012937/webrev.01/
On 04/22/13 12:10, Eric McCorkle wrote:
Hello,
Please review this simple change, which corrects some errors in the
javadoc comments for method parameter reflection.
Note that this changeset does not include any code changes.
The webrev is here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~emc/8012937/webrev.00/
Also, if you have any additional issues with the javadoc comments,
please reply to this request with a description of the problem.
Thanks,
Eric
