> On Feb 8, 2017, at 8:17 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>
>
> I have made this change in my workspace:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_8173898/webrev.05/
>
>/**
> * Shows all reflection frames.
> *
> * By default, reflection frames are hidden. A {@code St
On 08/02/17 15:58, Mandy Chung wrote:
I disagree: the text starts by saying:
"By default reflection frames are hidden. The reflection
frames include […]"
209 * Shows all reflection frames.
This is the first sentence. line 216-217 repeats line 209.
but the sentence at lines 216-217 i
> On Feb 8, 2017, at 3:36 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>
> Hi Mandy,
>
> Thanks for all the suggestions!
>
> On 07/02/17 20:03, Mandy Chung wrote:
>>> Please find below a new webrev that incorporates your feedback.
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_8173898/webrev.03/
>>>
>>
>> I think
Hi Mandy,
Thanks for all the suggestions!
On 07/02/17 20:03, Mandy Chung wrote:
Please find below a new webrev that incorporates your feedback.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_8173898/webrev.03/
I think this sentence is not needed.
216 * A {@code StackWalker} with this {@
> On Feb 7, 2017, at 5:10 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>
> Hi Mandy,
>
> On 06/02/17 00:16, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> Thanks for the patch and uncover that Constructor::newInstance is not
>> covered by SHOW_REFLECT_FRAMES.
>>
>> The change looks okay. The javadoc of SHOW_REFLECT_FRA
Hi Mandy,
On 06/02/17 00:16, Mandy Chung wrote:
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for the patch and uncover that Constructor::newInstance is not covered
by SHOW_REFLECT_FRAMES.
The change looks okay. The javadoc of SHOW_REFLECT_FRAMES can be clarified to
include Constructor::newInstance. As for the test,
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for the patch and uncover that Constructor::newInstance is not covered
by SHOW_REFLECT_FRAMES.
The change looks okay. The javadoc of SHOW_REFLECT_FRAMES can be clarified to
include Constructor::newInstance. As for the test, can you separate this in a
new test to test show
This looks fine to me, Daniel.
Fun test case. :)
Thanks,
-Brent
On 02/03/2017 11:51 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Hi,
Please find below a simple fix for:
8173898: StackWalker.walk throws InternalError if called
from a constructor invoked through reflection.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/b
> On 3 Feb 2017, at 15:27, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> On 03/02/17 21:54, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>>
>>> On 3 Feb 2017, at 11:51, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Please find below a simple fix for:
>>>
>>> 8173898: StackWalker.walk throws InternalError if called
>>>from
Hi Paul,
On 03/02/17 21:54, Paul Sandoz wrote:
On 3 Feb 2017, at 11:51, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Hi,
Please find below a simple fix for:
8173898: StackWalker.walk throws InternalError if called
from a constructor invoked through reflection.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-81738
> On 3 Feb 2017, at 11:51, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Please find below a simple fix for:
>
> 8173898: StackWalker.walk throws InternalError if called
> from a constructor invoked through reflection.
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173898
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.ne
Hi,
Please find below a new webrev. Part of the fix was mising
in the previous one. I also took the opportunity to replace
the test's assertEquals with those from org.testng.Assert.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_8173898/webrev.01
best regards,
-- daniel
On 03/02/17 19:51, Daniel F
Hi,
Please find below a simple fix for:
8173898: StackWalker.walk throws InternalError if called
from a constructor invoked through reflection.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173898
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_8173898/webrev.00/
best regards,
-- daniel
13 matches
Mail list logo
