Am 02.08.2011 21:44, schrieb Mike Duigou:
Hello All;
A fairly simple bug to review which snuck through testing.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/7073296/0/webrev/
The changes to Class are incidental but so trivial that opted to include them.
I can remove if anyone feels strongly (or even w
com/sun/jndi/toolkit/dir/SearchFilter.java
451 for (NamingEnumeration ve = attr.getAll();
452 ve.hasMore();
453) {
The update is OK. But the coding style looks uncomfortable. Would you
mind change it to use for-each style?
. javax/naming/directory/BasicAtt
On 8/2/2011 3:32 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
On Aug 2 2011, at 15:27 , joe.da...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Mike.
Thanks for developing the fix for this. Generally looks good to go back; a few minor
nits. Personally, I would leave the "// Doesn't use Boolean.getBoolean to avoid
class init." note i
On Aug 2 2011, at 15:27 , joe.da...@oracle.com wrote:
> Hi Mike.
>
> Thanks for developing the fix for this. Generally looks good to go back; a
> few minor nits. Personally, I would leave the "// Doesn't use
> Boolean.getBoolean to avoid class init." note in java.lang.Class unless you
> kno
Hi Mike.
Thanks for developing the fix for this. Generally looks good to go
back; a few minor nits. Personally, I would leave the "// Doesn't use
Boolean.getBoolean to avoid class init." note in java.lang.Class unless
you know the comment is not relevant any more. Given the default
semanti
Hello All;
A fairly simple bug to review which snuck through testing.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/7073296/0/webrev/
The changes to Class are incidental but so trivial that opted to include them.
I can remove if anyone feels strongly (or even weakly) that they should be
excluded.
Mike
Thanks for reviewing! See my responses inline.
I'll wait on sending another webrev until I've received the rest of your
comments.
-Sasha
On 8/2/2011 2:19 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Please review these JNDI changes.
Bug detail: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7072353
webrev: htt
Thanks for reviewing! Please see my responses inline.
I'll wait on sending another webrev until I've received the rest of your
comments.
-Sasha
On 8/2/2011 2:19 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Please review these JNDI changes.
Bug detail: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7072353
webr
On Aug 3, 2011, at 12:11 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Xuelei Fan wrote:
>> :
>> 1. I noticed the copyright date of a few files are unchanged, please
>> update them before you push the changes.
>>
> This has come up a few times but I don't think it is strictly required. Kelly
> or one of the rel
Xuelei Fan wrote:
:
1. I noticed the copyright date of a few files are unchanged, please
update them before you push the changes.
This has come up a few times but I don't think it is strictly required.
Kelly or one of the release engineers run a script over the forest
periodically to fix up
Changeset: 809e8db0c142
Author:chegar
Date: 2011-07-29 10:55 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/809e8db0c142
6978200: ServerSocket.toString include "port=0" in the returned String
Summary: Removal of "port=0" from ServerSocket.toString method
Reviewed-by: alanb, c
> Please review these JNDI changes.
> Bug detail: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7072353
> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/7072353/0/webrev/
Thanks for your effort to make JNDI free of compile-warning. The work is
hard, I appreciate it.
1. I noticed the copyright d
12 matches
Mail list logo
