On 08/27/2013 12:00 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Aug 26, 2013, at 11:13 PM, Remi Forax <fo...@univ-mlv.fr> wrote:
On 08/26/2013 10:10 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On Aug 25, 2013, at 8:04 PM, Remi Forax <fo...@univ-mlv.fr> wrote:
On 08/21/2013 02:25 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi,
Here are Doug's Linked/HashMap changes, discussed in a previous thread, as a
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/tl/JDK-8023463-Linked-HashMap-bin-and-tree/webrev/
I also added some tests related to characteristics associated with fixing
another bug.
Looking at the diffs will be tricky given there are so many changes.
The code can be simplified a little bit by using the diamond syntax,
HashMap (lines: 919, 963, 1026, 1497, 1569) and
LinkedHashMap (lines: 255, 264, 270, 278)
There are a bunch of @Override that are missing making the code harder than it
should to read.
Yes, i think this is because it sticks to the 166 style i suspect. Easy to
change.
Note that j.u. classes are quite inconsistent in this respect to using diamonds
and @Overrides. My preference is to do a sweeping change to all such code. I
wonder if an IDE can automate that?
Eclipse has a 'cleanup tool' for that. So it is able to add @Override
but unfortunately, not to add diamonds.
[...]
Thanks.
Here is the latest patch that also includes updates for the above 2 comments
and Mike's comments:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/tl/JDK-8023463-Linked-HashMap-bin-and-tree/webrev/
Paul.
It looks good for me.
Rémi
