Hi all,
I'm going to commit this one soon.
It is a change which is already in gcc. Fails w/o patch under darwin-ppc.
Andreas
2007-03-09 Andreas Tobler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Port change from gcc:
2007-03-06 Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* doc/Makefile.am(gkeyto
Keith Seitz wrote:
[my apologies for the delay in getting back to you]
Kyle Galloway wrote:
Keith Seitz wrote:
>
I see that this method can throw InvalidObjectException if the
object ID is not known by the ID manager. How is
JdwpInternalErrorException thrown?
This gets thrown by JdwpString.
[my apologies for the delay in getting back to you]
Kyle Galloway wrote:
Keith Seitz wrote:
>
I see that this method can throw InvalidObjectException if the object
ID is not known by the ID manager. How is JdwpInternalErrorException
thrown?
This gets thrown by JdwpString.readString().
Ah..
On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 12:28 -0800, Keith Seitz wrote:
> Okay, so there seems to be universal agreement on that. All we need
> now is for Mark to chime in and disagree. :-)
No, no, no! I know better than to disagree with an universal agreement.
Could someone just make a patch for doc/cp-hacking.te
Mario Torre wrote:
Il giorno ven, 09/03/2007 alle 12.05 -0800, Keith Seitz ha scritto:
2) After
/**
* foo
*/
@Override
I presume most people would prefer #1?
Keith
I speak for myself, but I think most of us agree here, doing #1 would
make things to lost easily, for example in case of l
On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 15:17 -0500, Francis Kung wrote:
> @Override
> public void foo();
> >>
> >> Me too. Three votes... maybe the motion passes? :)
> >
> > So that's several votes for this style already.
>
> +1, FWIW
>
> > 2) After
> > /**
> > * foo
> > */
> > @Override
>
> +1 f
@Override
public void foo();
Me too. Three votes... maybe the motion passes? :)
So that's several votes for this style already.
+1, FWIW
2) After
/**
* foo
*/
@Override
+1 for annotations after javadoc, it feels clearer that way.
Francis
Il giorno ven, 09/03/2007 alle 12.05 -0800, Keith Seitz ha scritto:
> 2) After
> /**
> * foo
> */
> @Override
>
> I presume most people would prefer #1?
>
> Keith
>
I speak for myself, but I think most of us agree here, doing #1 would
make things to lost easily, for example in case of long
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 12:05:42PM -0800, Keith Seitz wrote:
> Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>"Mario" == Mario Torre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >>>@Override
> >>>public void foo();
> >
> >Me too. Three votes... maybe the motion passes? :)
>
> So that's several votes for this style already. On
Tom Tromey wrote:
"Mario" == Mario Torre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
@Override
public void foo();
Me too. Three votes... maybe the motion passes? :)
So that's several votes for this style already. One last question: what
about comments/javadoc?
1) Before
@Override
/**
* foo
*/
2)
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 08:25:37PM +0100, Mario Torre wrote:
> Il giorno ven, 09/03/2007 alle 10.35 -0800, Keith Seitz ha scritto:
>
> > @Override
> > public void foo();
>
> I suggest this one. It seems more clear to me.
+1
Cheers,
Michael
--
.''`. | Michael Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :' :
> "Mario" == Mario Torre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> @Override
>> public void foo();
Mario> I suggest this one. It seems more clear to me.
Me too. Three votes... maybe the motion passes? :)
FWIW you won't see too many annotations in the source right now,
especially not @Override. I t
> "Marco" == Marco Trudel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Yeah, I think the Linux code may take a different path on this
>> particular test case. But, I do see a similar bug here on Linux with
>> Mauve.
Marco> Can you send me that test? I can't reproduce it on Linux...
It is the String.getBy
Mario Torre writes:
> Il giorno ven, 09/03/2007 alle 10.35 -0800, Keith Seitz ha scritto:
>
> > @Override
> > public void foo();
>
> I suggest this one. It seems more clear to me.
+1
Andrew.
Il giorno ven, 09/03/2007 alle 10.35 -0800, Keith Seitz ha scritto:
> @Override
> public void foo();
I suggest this one. It seems more clear to me.
Ciao,
Mario
--
Lima Software - http://www.limasoftware.net/
GNU Classpath Developer - http://www.classpath.org/
Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Profil
Hi,
The Classpath Hacker's Guide doesn't mention anything about annotations.
Doing a quick grep of the sources, I see that, e.g., the "@Override"
annotation is being handled in several different ways:
@Override
public void foo();
@Override public void foo();
public @Override void foo();
Do
Tom Tromey wrote:
"Marco" == Marco Trudel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marco> The attached CharsetEncoderTest.java fails on Windows with an
Marco> IllegalStateException. It works on Linux. I don't know why, but I
Marco> assume because it doesn't need a CharsetEncoder.
Yeah, I think the Linux co
This removes one usage of the Buffers class from
SinglePixelPackedSampleModel (the Buffers class covers more than is
supported by the SPPSM).
2007-03-09 Roman Kennke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* java/awt/image/SinglePixelPackageSampleModel.java
(createDataBuffer): Avoid use of Buffers
This removes any usage of the Buffers helper class in
ComponentSampleModel. The problem with that has been that it casts the
DataBuffer to some specific subtype, which wouldn't work for other
independent implementations of DataBuffer (e.g. a DataBuffer that maps
to raw shared memory). Also, the Sam
19 matches
Mail list logo
