Thank you for your review!

-Dan

On 08/07/2013 12:08 PM, Remi Forax wrote:
On 08/07/2013 08:59 PM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Amended version approved to go back.

Thanks,

-Joe

As one of the guys involved in the design of this API :)
I'm Ok with this change.

RĂ©mi


On 08/07/2013 11:54 AM, Dan Xu wrote:
I see, Thanks! I have updated my changeto http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/8022554/webrev1/.

-Dan

On 08/07/2013 11:46 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Hi Dan,

Even if the compiler does not complain, using "Class" or "Class[]" is using a raw type and raw types should generally be viewed as unacceptable in modern code.

Cheers,

-Joe

On 08/07/2013 11:36 AM, Dan Xu wrote:
Thanks for your review!

I was thinking of that. But without Class<?>[] on the left, the compiler just worked fine.

Here is a simple example,

//Main.java

import java.util.*;

public class Main {
    public static final Class[] TEST_CLASS = new Class<?>[16];
    public static final List[] TEST_MAP = new ArrayList<?>[16];
}

After compiling with javac Xlint:all Main.java, no warnings are printed out. Is it a compiler issue? Thanks!

-Dan



On 08/07/2013 11:11 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
I agree with Mike; Class<?>[] should be used on both sides.

Cheers,

-Joe

On 08/07/2013 10:53 AM, Mike Duigou wrote:
Why not have Class<?>[] on the left side as well?

Mike

On Aug 7 2013, at 10:49 , Dan Xu wrote:

Hi All,

Please review the simple warning fix in src/share/classes/sun/invoke/anon/ConstantPoolPatch.java.

webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/8022554/webrev/

Thanks,

-Dan







Reply via email to