Hi Stuart, On Mar 4, 2014, at 1:09 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
> Just a couple small items. > > At line 4203, the type of magnitude should be byte[] instead of int[]. > Whoops, I could have sworn I wrote that in my previous review, but it must > have gotten dropped while I was editing. Sorry about that. I caught that myself and fixed it. > For the four compatibility fields in the serial form, the comment is > > appears in the serialized for backward compatibility > > Something is missing here. Should it say "appears in the serialized form for > backward compatibility" ? I also caught and fixed that. > The comment block at lines 4300-4306 is good. I might also add a note to say > these values are compatible with older implementations. Will do (I'll refresh the updated webrev at the link below). >>> There are some things in the serialization doc that ought to be brought up >>> to date, though. Note that the docs for serialPersistentFields, readObject, >>> and writeObject appear in the javadoc output, in the "Serialized Form" >>> page, even though these members are private! >> >> Isn't this controlled by options passed to the javadoc tool as opposed to >> settings in the source code? > > No, serialization is "special" in that all information about the serialized > form, including the docs these special private methods and fields, do appear > in the Serialized Form output, regardless of the javadoc tool arguments. Thanks for the clarification. >> I think I'll need another "thumbs up" as this has changed since Paul's >> approval was posted. > > Paul is not available this week. If you want to make these corrections and > then just push the changeset, it's fine by me; I think it's had enough review. Sounds good. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8035279/webrev.03/ I think I have to get a CCC request approved first however but if the approval is in place I can push immediately thereafter. Thanks, Brian
