Thank you Martin!
On 15.03.2014 17:24, Martin Buchholz wrote:
We understand the intent of removeRange better now. I agree that making
further improvements is tricky.
I think we can all agree that the initial patch
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8014066/0/webrev/jdk.patch
is a clear improv
On 14/03/2014 10:22 PM, Doug Lea wrote:
On 03/14/2014 08:07 AM, David Holmes wrote:
So what you are saying is that protected overrides of protected
methods are not
required to honor the specification of the super method?
Not always, but ...
That certainly gives some implementation flexibil
Hi Martin,
On 15/03/2014 11:24 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
We understand the intent of removeRange better now. I agree that making
further improvements is tricky.
Almost impossible I'd say :)
I think we can all agree that the initial patch
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8014066/0/webrev
