On Sep 27, 2018, at 9:00 AM, Raffaello Giulietti <raffaello.giulie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2018-09-27 17:53, Andrew Dinn wrote: >> On 27/09/18 16:37, Raffaello Giulietti wrote: >> . . . >>> I thank you in advance for your willingness to review the code but my >>> understanding is that only the officially appointed reviewers can >>> approve OpenJDK contributions, which is of course a good policy. >>> Besides, as two Andrews engineers from RedHat correctly observe, >>> understanding the rationale of the code without the planned accompanying >>> paper is hard. >> Oh no, let me stop you right there! Anyone competent can offer a review >> (well incompetent people can too but let's assume they get ignored :-). >> Indeed, an expert critique is always very welcome and reviewers normally >> get credited even if they have no official status. The official >> reviewers are needed for a final say so. No one sensible is going to >> reject clear and clearly justified advice. > > An excellent policy, indeed! I was going to reply with essentially the same comments. While an imprimatur from at least one sanctioned OpenJDK reviewer is required eventually, comments and review from any competent parties are most welcome. This is especially the case for a relatively complicated topic such as the one of this thread. >>>> I'm not a contributor to the Jdk, and this isn't my full-time job. I >>>> was lurking here because I was going to send a patch for the double to >>>> string conversion code myself (based on Ryu). >>>> >>> >>> All my efforts on this projects are done in my unpaid spare time, too. >> Which is very much appreciated, thank you. > > Thank all of you for your interest in this issue. I would like to second that. It is great to see so many comments on this topic and to have knowledgable people paying attention. Brian
