This seems like a bit of a workaround to insert what you would like to
be the
current end result of javadoc processing instead of letting javadoc
process it.
If the output format of @since tags changed you would not get the
benefit of it.
And after reading the linked bug reports which have comme
Sorry .. this got lost ..
I don't understand this line :
253 jobjectArray emptyArray = env->NewObjectArray(1, clazz, NULL);
This is returning an array of length 1 and element 0 is NULL.
I think you want
env->NewObjectArray(0, clazz, NULL); and I don't see why you need to
create it there inst
Oh .. and I meant to ask what probably is an obvious question but needs
to be asked anyway.
You say you did not try to fix tests that already fail - this is just a
conversion - but did you
confirm there are no NEW failures on any platform ?
-phil.
On 1/30/19 2:29 PM, Phil Race wrote:
You dis
You discuss the life cycle of an applet in jtreg
---
- Call init() and start() methods of the Applet
- Waits for 2 seconds
- Call stop() and destroy() methods of the Applet
- Dispose the frame
--
I see init() and start() being used but I don't see the rest replaced.
Why not
The synopsis - which I rephrased for better English, turns out to still
not represent most of what is happening here. The synopsis would
make one think this is mostly about removing an unused abstract class
and the font changes are a foot note to that. In fact this is MOSTLY
about removing per-app
Looks fine.
On 30/01/2019 09:39, Prasanta Sadhukhan wrote:
+1
Regards
Prasanta
On 30-Jan-19 10:59 PM, Phil Race wrote:
Bug : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8218020
This is a trivial fix to a license file for JDK 12 needed because v5.0 is what
we are tracking as using, but the licens
Approved.
On 1/29/19 1:34 AM, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
Ping. The change is for 13.
Please push to jdk/client
-phil.
On 1/11/19 3:44 PM, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
Hello,
Please review a small fix for type cast error reported by modern
compiler. It is a port from master repo where the changeset
+1
Regards
Prasanta
On 30-Jan-19 10:59 PM, Phil Race wrote:
Bug : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8218020
This is a trivial fix to a license file for JDK 12 needed because v5.0
is what
we are tracking as using, but the license file isn't updated from v4.1
The licensed header file (ju
Bug : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8218020
This is a trivial fix to a license file for JDK 12 needed because v5.0
is what
we are tracking as using, but the license file isn't updated from v4.1
The licensed header file (just one file !) is identical between v4.1 +
v5.0 - ie
the sour
Hello Dmitry.
Thank you for your suggestion.
I applied a fix to ignore infinity loop and applied your patch.
But color was mixed up...
I opened JDK-8218054 [1].
It seems new color implementation is required.
I am glad that some experts will check the related codes.
[1] https://bugs.openjdk.jav
10 matches
Mail list logo
