Hi David,
On 24/05/2013 2:06 AM, David Chase wrote:
So where do we stand on this?
Can we call it a bug and eligible for inclusion?
And are there other issues to deal with?
I think this form of the optimization is more amenable to inclusion.
I would be happy to discuss exactly what is going o
On 25/05/2013 4:14 AM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
The webrev with the proposed changes is here. As I mentioned in one of the
replies, there are 4 j.u.c tests that need to be updated so I've changed
these tests to use Unsafe.throwException.
Al
I concur with Martin on all counts.
Confusing NUL and NULL is also a pet peeve of mine :)
David
On 25/05/2013 2:15 AM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Hi John,
The memory leak fix looks good.
---
IIRC I was the author of the comment, so it is not surprising that I might
prefer that version. "nul" is
On 26/05/2013 1:41 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 25/05/2013 09:37, Aleksej Efimov wrote:
David, Jason,
Thank you for your comments and suggestions. They all were taken in
account and as a result - the new webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dmeetry/8009581/webrev.2/
I think this looks better. I as
On 05/26/13 08:08, Peter Levart wrote:
Clever idea. So your common TreeNode would extend LinkedHashMap.Entry.
Right. (Or renamings/refactorings of these).
And that begets other improvements in part by guaranteeing root
is first node of bin, so doesn't need TreeBins (which I cannot do in
CHM bec
On 05/26/2013 01:34 PM, Doug Lea wrote:
On 05/26/13 07:02, Peter Levart wrote:
I couldn't work out a TreeNode class that could be used by both
HashMap and
LinkedHashMap, since LHM would need a TreeNode derived from
LinkedHashMap.Entry, not HashMap.Entry.
So instead I used composition, wher
On 05/26/13 07:02, Peter Levart wrote:
I couldn't work out a TreeNode class that could be used by both HashMap and
LinkedHashMap, since LHM would need a TreeNode derived from
LinkedHashMap.Entry, not HashMap.Entry.
So instead I used composition, where TreeNode has-a [Linked]HashMap.Entry.
Hi
Hi Philippe,
I think you are looking for Map.computeIfAbsent(K, Supplier) which was
added to Map interface recently.
Regards, Peter
On 05/26/2013 01:22 PM, Philippe Marschall wrote:
Hi
I often find myself writing code like this:
ConcurrentMap map = ...;
Object value = map.get(key);
if (val
On 26.05.2013 13:25, Peter Levart wrote:
Hi Philippe,
I think you are looking for Map.computeIfAbsent(K, Supplier) which was
added to Map interface recently.
Yes I am, thanks.
Philippe
Hi
I often find myself writing code like this:
ConcurrentMap map = ...;
Object value = map.get(key);
if (value == null) {
Object newValue = expensiveComputation();
Object previous = map.putIfAbsent(key, newValue);
if (previous != null) {
value = previous;
} else {
value = newValu
Hi
It would be nice if javax.xml.stream.XMLStreamReader and
javax.xml.stream.XMLStreamWriter could be made to extend
java.lang.AutoCloseable so that they can be used in a try-with-resouces
statement. The some does for XMLEventReader and XMLEventReader.
I'm not sure this is the right mailing
On 05/23/2013 09:02 PM, Brent Christian wrote:
On 5/23/13 5:20 AM, Doug Lea wrote:
* Given that balanced trees are not used in WeakHashMap
or Hashtable, I wonder why the TreeNode etc classes are
not just nested inside HashMap (usable from subclass LinkedHashMap).
And if so, it would be simpler,
12 matches
Mail list logo
