As per [1] I'm updating this thread with yet another webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8048267/webrev.05
----------------------------------------------------------------------- [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-July/027487.html -Pavel On 30 Jun 2014, at 13:04, Pavel Rappo <pavel.ra...@oracle.com> wrote: > If a test run finishes fine, I'll push this version (no > Unsafe*LongFieldFieldAccessorImpl.java files included): > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8048267/webrev.04/ > > -Pavel > > On 30 Jun 2014, at 11:31, Andrej Golovnin <andrej.golov...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Pavel, >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8048267/webrev.03/src/share/classes/sun/reflect/UnsafeLongFieldAccessorImpl.java.sdiff.html >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8048267/webrev.03/src/share/classes/sun/reflect/UnsafeQualifiedLongFieldAccessorImpl.java.sdiff.html >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8048267/webrev.03/src/share/classes/sun/reflect/UnsafeQualifiedStaticLongFieldAccessorImpl.java.sdiff.html >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8048267/webrev.03/src/share/classes/sun/reflect/UnsafeStaticLongFieldAccessorImpl.java.sdiff.html >> >> Please don't change the UnsafeXXXFieldAccessorImpl classes. >> This classes should be changed as a part of the fix of the issue 5043030. >> The patch for this issue has been already submitted, see here: >> >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-June/027311.html >> >> When Joel is back, he will continue to work on it. >> >> Otherwise it looks good to me. >> >> Best regards, >> Andrej Golovnin >
