Re: RFR: 6594697 - varargs message and Throwable methods for java.util.Logger

I was one the fence with the parameter ordering and would like additional feedback on this point. I started off as you suggested, but didn't like the fact that the params were separated from the msg by the Throwable. I could go either way, but would like to hear from others on this point. T

Re: Review/comment needed for the new public java.util.Base64 class

Am 24.10.2012 04:56, schrieb Xueming Shen: Thanks for the review. I hope I addressed most of the comments in the updated webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/4235519/webrev Hi Sherman, my additional comments: I'm "confused" about the order of xxcode() and Xxcoder. In other places e.

Review request for 8001536

Hi, This is a request for review of http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lancea/8001536/webrev.00/. This adds read/writeObject as well as clone methods to SerialXLob classes. All SQE tests passed, 1 failure in the RowSet JCK/TCK tests due to a bug in the test that the TCK team is aware of and will ad

Re: Review/comment needed for the new public java.util.Base64 class

Oops: lineLength << 2 >> 2 I meant:: lineLength >> 2 << 2 -Ulf

hg: jdk8/tl/langtools: 8001929: fix doclint errors in langtools doc comments

Changeset: 23fe1a96bc0f Author:jjg Date: 2012-10-30 10:15 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/langtools/rev/23fe1a96bc0f 8001929: fix doclint errors in langtools doc comments Reviewed-by: darcy ! src/share/classes/com/sun/tools/doclets/formats/html/HtmlDocletWriter.java !

Re: Review request for 8001536

On 10/30/2012 05:25 PM, Lance Andersen - Oracle wrote: Hi, This is a request for review of http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lancea/8001536/webrev.00/. This adds read/writeObject as well as clone methods to SerialXLob classes. All SQE tests passed, 1 failure in the RowSet JCK/TCK tests due to a b

Re: Review request for 8001536

Hi all, please add the bug summary to the subject line. Bug 8001536 is not publicly visible :-( -Ulf Am 30.10.2012 17:25, schrieb Lance Andersen - Oracle: Hi, This is a request for review of http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lancea/8001536/webrev.00/. This adds read/writeObject as well as clone

Re: Review request for 8001536

Hi Ulf, The bug is described below, it is just adding the read/writeObject and clone methods. Best Lance On Oct 30, 2012, at 2:18 PM, Ulf Zibis wrote: > Hi all, > > please add the bug summary to the subject line. > Bug 8001536 is not publicly visible :-( > > -Ulf > > Am 30.10.2012 17:25, sc

Re: RFR: 6594697 - varargs message and Throwable methods for java.util.Logger

On 30/10/2012 14:21, Jim Gish wrote: I was one the fence with the parameter ordering and would like additional feedback on this point. I started off as you suggested, but didn't like the fact that the params were separated from the msg by the Throwable. I could go either way, but would like t

Re: Review/comment needed for the new public java.util.Base64 class

Hi Sherman, thanks for your details. Has this discussion been on the list, and I have missed it? I see a problem with hiding the "singleton" choice: Developers might tend to repetitively invoke public static Encoder getEncoder(int lineLength, byte[] lineSeparator) instead reusing the the sam

Re: Review request for 8001536

Thanks Lance. But having the subject of the request in clear text in the list view of the email client would be a great help. -Ulf Am 30.10.2012 19:28, schrieb Lance Andersen - Oracle: Hi Ulf, The bug is described below, it is just adding the read/writeObject and clone methods. Best Lanc

Re: Review request for 8001536

Hi Remi, Thank you for the feedback On Oct 30, 2012, at 2:05 PM, Remi Forax wrote: > On 10/30/2012 05:25 PM, Lance Andersen - Oracle wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This is a request for review of >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lancea/8001536/webrev.00/. This adds >> read/writeObject as well as clone m

Re: Review request for 8001536

Point taken Ulf, thank you for the feedback and will follow your suggestion going forward , which I typically do, but I think I am still feeling the effects of being offline due to hurricane sandy :-( Best Lance On Oct 30, 2012, at 2:50 PM, Ulf Zibis wrote: > Thanks Lance. > > But having the

Re: Review request for 8001536

On 30/10/2012 18:05, Remi Forax wrote: in writeObject, you set "blob" twice, which is weird, also I think that if blob is not Serializable, the code should throw an exception, so you should not use instanceof and let s.writeFields() to throw NotSerializable exception. Yes, that is odd. I thin

Re: RFR: 6594697 - varargs message and Throwable methods for java.util.Logger

I've prepared a new webrev retaining the parameter ordering, but removing the isLoggable() refactoring for now. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jgish/Bug6594697-AddLogThrowable/ Thanks, Jim If this looks o.k. I'll submit to CC

Re: Review/comment needed for the new public java.util.Base64 class

Hi Ulf, thanks for the comments. Webrev has been updated to address most of your comments. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/4235519/webrev (1) all @param and @return tags have been "normalized". (2) private constructor BAse64() {} has been moved up. (3) MIMELINEMAX and CRLF have been moved i