On 08/04/2017 20:56, Paul Rogers wrote:
As of your request, it makes no sense that the maintainer of the java
page publish his test results. A point does not make statistics...
Also, I do not have always the time (or the will) to sort out all the
test failures. Last time I run the tests, I had
> As of your request, it makes no sense that the maintainer of the java
> page publish his test results. A point does not make statistics...
> Also, I do not have always the time (or the will) to sort out all the
> test failures. Last time I run the tests, I had consistently more than
> 50 errors,
On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 03:34:44PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>
> > Also I think we have put too much emphasis on tests in the book at a certain
> > time. It was a waste of time, because tests more often reflect upstream
> > inability to fix things than something going real
Pierre Labastie wrote:
Also I think we have put too much emphasis on tests in the book at a certain
time. It was a waste of time, because tests more often reflect upstream
inability to fix things than something going really wrong. And it is very
unlikely that a particular test show something wro
On 06/04/2017 19:53, Paul Rogers wrote:
> In evaluating the tests, the book makes reference to:
> http://download.java.net/openjdk/testresults/8/
>
> However, that page is updated regularly, with every build they make,
> at the moment 152, so is virtually useless for comparison. May I
> suggest/r
In evaluating the tests, the book makes reference to:
http://download.java.net/openjdk/testresults/8/
However, that page is updated reqularly, with every build they make,
at the moment 152, so is virtually useless for comparison. May I
suggest/request the book include the test results relevant at
