[OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8182043: Access to Windows Large Icons

2020-09-28 Thread Alexander Zuev
Moving review from Mercurial. See 
https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2020-August/016078.html for 
previous
iteration.

-

Commit messages:
 - emoved whitespaces from test
 - 8182043: Access to Windows Large Icons

Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/380/files
 Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk=380=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8182043
  Stats: 336 lines in 6 files changed: 270 ins; 25 del; 41 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/380.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/380/head:pull/380

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/380


Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8251123: doclint warnings about missing javadoc tags and comments

2020-09-28 Thread Sergey Bylokhov
On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 06:30:31 GMT, Jayathirth D V  wrote:

> Inputs from 
> https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/beans-dev/2020-August/000424.html are 
> incorporated or is this fresh
> git review?

It is a fresh update, it changes from the old review request. I made it less 
"dangerous".

-

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/369


Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8251123: doclint warnings about missing javadoc tags and comments

2020-09-28 Thread Jayathirth D V
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 21:45:39 GMT, Sergey Bylokhov  wrote:

> We have a number of missing javadoc tags and comments in the desktop module.
> Most of the missing comments are related to the serialized form.
> 
> The fix:
>   - Adds missing comments to the non-static/non-transient fields(even 
> private) of the "serializable" classes
>   - Adds comments to the "serializable" classes even if those classes are 
> non-public
>   - Fixes references/adds missing tags to the special methods(like 
> readObject/writeObject)
>   - Delete the java.awt.PeerFixer class.
> 
> I need advice about what exact change should be reviewed in  the CSR(except 
> PeerFixer removal)
> 
> Note that in some cases I added the comments to the "implementation details", 
> so I did not specify it fully.
> 
> The old review request:
> https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/beans-dev/2020-August/000423.html

Inputs from 
https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/beans-dev/2020-August/000424.html are 
incorporated or is this fresh
git review?

-

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/369