Hello!
So the conversion was successfully performed for client components:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211300
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/client/rev/2e330da7cbf4
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211693
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/client/rev/de9486d74a74
Now we can mov
Thank you very much for working on these cleanups. I've occasionally done
similar in the past.
I've made big changesets with only one automated change at a time.
So e.g. I would do only
"C-style array declaration"
in one changeset. This is one example of a change that should leave zero
impact on
Hello!
Ok, let's start with smaller thing which is java.desktop. Created a
JBS issue and posted a patch here:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2018-October/009486.html
Jonathan,
> Although cleanup like this is nice, I'll give a word of warning that pervasive
> changes like that can
On 09/28/2018 04:13 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 28/09/2018 05:51, Tagir Valeev wrote:
Hello!
I can volunteer doing this if OpenJDK community is really interested.
I've launched the inspection over all java.* and jdk.* modules and
found 4064 warnings.
As an example, I converted all C-style arr
I can review the changes in java.desktop, please use these email alias
awt-dev/2d-dev/swing-dev.
On 28/09/2018 04:13, Alan Bateman wrote:
As regards doing the entire source base then I think that would be good.
Due to the complexity of testing, changes to the java.desktop module are
pushed to
On 28/09/2018 05:51, Tagir Valeev wrote:
Hello!
I can volunteer doing this if OpenJDK community is really interested.
I've launched the inspection over all java.* and jdk.* modules and
found 4064 warnings.
As an example, I converted all C-style array declarations in java.base
module (660 warning
> To: "ullenb...@gmail.com <mailto:ullenb...@gmail.com>"
> > mailto:ullenb...@gmail.com>>
> > Cc: "core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
> > <mailto:core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net>" > <mailto:core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net>>
On 9/11/18 10:36 PM, Michael Rasmussen wrote:
Can a language syntax/feature be deprecated to produce a warning in javac?
Perhaps this one should.
We haven't reached the point of formally deprecating language features, but
certain features like this one (and others) are certainly frowned upo
nb...@gmail.com>>
Cc: "core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
<mailto:core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net>" mailto:core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net>>
Bcc:
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 13:23:41 -0700
Subject: Re: ByteArrayOutputStream should not have a new writeBytes method
> I noticed a few others nearby. It's startling that a new occurrence has crept
> it.
At least I haven't seen it on return types, like: public byte toArray() [] {
... }
> An interesting exercise would be to write a detector for this declaration
> style.
Can a language syntax/feature be deprecat
13:23:41 -0700
> Subject: Re: ByteArrayOutputStream should not have a new writeBytes method
> in Java 11
2. even if, it should not be byte b[] but byte[] b
> Yeah we need to clean occurrences of this anachronistic array declaration
> from the JDK. I noticed a few others nearby. It
It's an errorprone warning, for "easy" removal ... __IF__ you can run
errorprone on the head sources.
I think it's
http://errorprone.info/bugpattern/MixedArrayDimensions
On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Brian Burkhalter
wrote:
>
> On Sep 11, 2018, at 1:23 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
>
>>> 2. even i
On Sep 11, 2018, at 1:23 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> 2. even if, it should not be byte b[] but byte[] b
>
> Yeah we need to clean occurrences of this anachronistic array declaration
> from the JDK. I noticed a few others nearby. It's startling that a new
> occurrence has crept it. (Or maybe n
2. even if, it should not be byte b[] but byte[] b
Yeah we need to clean occurrences of this anachronistic array declaration from
the JDK. I noticed a few others nearby. It's startling that a new occurrence has
crept it. (Or maybe not, perhaps it was done to conform to the nearby code.)
Any
See the comments here https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8180410
/Michael
From: core-libs-dev on behalf of
Christian Ullenboom
Sent: 11 September 2018 01:18:42
To: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: ByteArrayOutputStream should not have a new
1. There is write(byte[]) already
2. even if, it should not be byte b[] but byte[] b
16 matches
Mail list logo
