On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 00:38:04 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> Julian Waters has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 79 commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into patch-10
>> - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 20:03:36 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> I see the advantage of collapsing self and parent into the same check, but
>> it doesn't seem like getting rid of pData is of much benefit, the checks for
>> null seem to remain the same either way
>
>> Sorry, I don't see a BOOL
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 06:44:02 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Sorry, I don't see a BOOL error anywhere?
>
> I see the advantage of collapsing self and parent into the same check, but it
> doesn't seem like getting rid of pData is of much benefit, the checks for
> null seem to remain the same
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 00:40:40 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> Julian Waters has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 79 commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into patch-10
>> - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 00:32:19 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> Julian Waters has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 79 commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into patch-10
>> - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 06:22:50 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> src/java.desktop/windows/native/libawt/windows/awt_Component.cpp line 6366:
>>
>>> 6364: jobject parent = data->parentComp;
>>> 6365:
>>> 6366: AwtComponent *awtComponent = nullptr;
>>
>> Looking at it (not tested) here
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 00:17:02 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> Julian Waters has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 79 commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into patch-10
>> - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 08:24:42 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> We should set the -permissive- flag for the Microsoft Visual C compiler, as
>> was requested by the now backed out
>> [JDK-8241499](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8241499). Doing so makes
>> the Visual C compiler much less
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 12:11:17 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> What is remaining to get this PR committable? It has such a long history that
> it is hard to get a grasp on the remaining issues.
>
> @TheShermanTanker Could you perhaps summarize the remaining hurdles?
It's largely complete by
On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 08:24:42 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> We should set the -permissive- flag for the Microsoft Visual C compiler, as
>> was requested by the now backed out
>> [JDK-8241499](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8241499). Doing so makes
>> the Visual C compiler much less
> We should set the -permissive- flag for the Microsoft Visual C compiler, as
> was requested by the now backed out
> [JDK-8241499](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8241499). Doing so makes
> the Visual C compiler much less accepting of ill formed code, which will
> improve code quality on
11 matches
Mail list logo
