On 29/02/2012 10:29 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Joe,
On 29/02/2012 3:03 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Belatedly catching up on email, please review the patch below to address
the issues you've raised. I searched for "method" and replaced it with
"executable" as appropriate throughout the javadoc of the c
Hi Joe,
On 29/02/2012 3:03 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Belatedly catching up on email, please review the patch below to address
the issues you've raised. I searched for "method" and replaced it with
"executable" as appropriate throughout the javadoc of the class.
That substitution seems fine in the p
On 2/28/2012 10:52 AM, Mike Duigou wrote:
These changes look good to me. Is there a new CR for the javadoc changes?
Thanks Mike; I was planning to file the bug after the reviews came in.
-Joe
Mike
On Feb 28 2012, at 09:03 , Joe Darcy wrote:
Hi David,
Belatedly catching up on email, plea
These changes look good to me. Is there a new CR for the javadoc changes?
Mike
On Feb 28 2012, at 09:03 , Joe Darcy wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Belatedly catching up on email, please review the patch below to address the
> issues you've raised. I searched for "method" and replaced it with
> "exe
Hi David,
Belatedly catching up on email, please review the patch below to address
the issues you've raised. I searched for "method" and replaced it with
"executable" as appropriate throughout the javadoc of the class.
Thanks,
-Joe
--- a/src/share/classes/java/lang/reflect/Executable.java
Just realized this has come in too late ...
Joe Darcy said the following on 07/20/11 05:49:
Agreed; I've posted a BlenderRev corresponding to the current patch at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/7007535.4/BR-7007535.html
Thanks. So now I can more readily see that the doc for Executable
On 7/19/2011 1:08 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 12:49 Tue 19 Jul , Joe Darcy wrote:
Agreed; I've posted a BlenderRev corresponding to the current patch at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/7007535.4/BR-7007535.html
What is BlenderRev? Google finds others posted by Oracle empl
Hi Mike.
On 7/19/2011 1:54 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
I reviewed the BlenderRev fairly closely and did not find any errors. The only weirdness
I saw was several cases where multiple "Specified by:" declarations were
present for a method and one of the instances referenced a class to which it didn'
I reviewed the BlenderRev fairly closely and did not find any errors. The only
weirdness I saw was several cases where multiple "Specified by:" declarations
were present for a method and one of the instances referenced a class to which
it didn't appear to be able to link to.
Example: Method.ge
On 12:49 Tue 19 Jul , Joe Darcy wrote:
> Agreed; I've posted a BlenderRev corresponding to the current patch at:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/7007535.4/BR-7007535.html
>
What is BlenderRev? Google finds others posted by Oracle employees but
not how to generate them.
> Thanks,
Agreed; I've posted a BlenderRev corresponding to the current patch at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/7007535.4/BR-7007535.html
Thanks,
-Joe
Mike Duigou wrote:
This looks good to me but I agree with David that it's probably important to
look at the generated javadoc and specdiff outpu
This looks good to me but I agree with David that it's probably important to
look at the generated javadoc and specdiff output before finalizing.
Mike
On Jul 18 2011, at 00:51 , Joe Darcy wrote:
> Peter and David.
>
> Thanks for the careful review; the @throws information still needs its own
Hi Joe,
Seems okay. Can you use blenderrev (or specdiff or some other tool) to
actually compare the generated javadoc output?
One stylistic comment. The {@inheritDoc} in the main comment block of
each method is superfluous as the default behaviour is to inherit those
javadoc attributes ie th
Peter and David.
Thanks for the careful review; the @throws information still needs its
own {@inheritDoc}; I've uploaded a webrev with this and other corrections:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/7007535.4
More comments interspersed below.
Thanks,
-Joe
Peter Jones wrote:
Hi Joe,
On Jul
Hi Joe,
On Jul 15, 2011, at 1:49 AM, David Holmes wrote:
> On 14/07/2011 12:21 PM, joe.da...@oracle.com wrote:
>> Please code review my JDK 8 changes for
>>
>> 7007535: (reflect) Please generalize Constructor and Method
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/7007535.3
>>
>> To summarize the change
Hi Joe,
On 14/07/2011 12:21 PM, joe.da...@oracle.com wrote:
Please code review my JDK 8 changes for
7007535: (reflect) Please generalize Constructor and Method
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/7007535.3
To summarize the changes, a new superclass is defined to capture the common
functionality
Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 19:21 Wed 13 Jul , joe.da...@oracle.com wrote:
Hello.
Please code review my JDK 8 changes for
7007535: (reflect) Please generalize Constructor and Method
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/7007535.3
To summarize the changes, a new superclass is de
On 19:21 Wed 13 Jul , joe.da...@oracle.com wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Please code review my JDK 8 changes for
>
> 7007535: (reflect) Please generalize Constructor and Method
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/7007535.3
>
> To summarize the changes, a new superclass is defined to capture th
Hello.
Please code review my JDK 8 changes for
7007535: (reflect) Please generalize Constructor and Method
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/7007535.3
To summarize the changes, a new superclass is defined to capture the
common functionality of java.lang.reflect.Method and
java.lang.refl
19 matches
Mail list logo
