On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Mark Hindess
mark.hind...@googlemail.comwrote:
due to the change in HARMONY-6346 Several archive bugfixes and
optimizations.
This test passes on the RI but fails on Harmony as:
InflaterOutputStream.write(-1);
no longer throws a ZipException. Jesse
2009/10/8 Mark Hindess mark.hind...@googlemail.com:
In message f944d83d0910072154n10694e10mc9c9cf80d35f5...@mail.gmail.com,
Alexey Varlamov writes:
I will do in few days.
Hi Mark,
Please find the complete update at HARMONY-6349 - all Russian pages
were inspected (there are not many of them
In message a43fbc6a0910112325o4162ef4h55193b471586d...@mail.gmail.com,
Jesse Wilson writes:
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Mark Hindess
mark.hind...@googlemail.com wrote:
due to the change in HARMONY-6346 Several archive bugfixes and
optimizations.
This test passes on the RI but
On 09/Oct/2009 01:39, Jesse Wilson wrote:
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Mark Hindess
mark.hind...@googlemail.comwrote:
I was wondering about our modules and potential for re-use.
For example, archive, auth, awt, imageio, nio, prefs, sql, security,
suncompat, swing, and x-net modules
With a simple getting being synchronized like this, I assume it is to
get the memory consistency on that field?
Looking at DatagramPacket, all of the methods are synchronized.
Wouldn't it be better to make these fields volatile, rather than
requiring the setters and getters to acquire the lock as
They were put in for a reason ;-) See HARMONY-6008.
Tim
On 12/Oct/2009 15:21, odea...@apache.org wrote:
Author: odeakin
Date: Mon Oct 12 14:21:41 2009
New Revision: 824353
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=824353view=rev
Log:
Remove unnecessary calls to new String(String).
Thanks Tim, I'm in the process of reverting the commit now (and Ill add
a comment to the code to make sure it doesn't happen again).
Regards,
Oliver
Tim Ellison wrote:
They were put in for a reason ;-) See HARMONY-6008.
Tim
On 12/Oct/2009 15:21, odea...@apache.org wrote:
Author:
Jimmy,
This commit creates a duplicate method for me. I've hacked it in
r824428 but feel free to commit a more appropriate fix.
How did this compile for you?
Regards,
Mark.
In message 20091012105834.d71912388...@eris.apache.org, lvj...@apache.org
writes:
Author: lvjing
Date: Mon Oct 12
[Original Message]
From: Tim Ellison t.p.elli...@gmail.com
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Date: 10/9/2009 2:54:32 AM
Subject: Re: [general] Remove @author tags from code (HARMONY-6348)
On 09/Oct/2009 00:25, Mark Hindess wrote:
In message 529434575.1255030111261.javamail.j...@brutus,
Jesse
On 12/10/2009, boot...@earthlink.net boot...@earthlink.net wrote:
[Original Message]
From: Tim Ellison t.p.elli...@gmail.com
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Date: 10/9/2009 2:54:32 AM
Subject: Re: [general] Remove @author tags from code (HARMONY-6348)
On 09/Oct/2009 00:25, Mark
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:47 AM, Tim Ellison t.p.elli...@gmail.com wrote:
With a simple getting being synchronized like this, I assume it is to
get the memory consistency on that field?
Yep. There were a two or three fields.
Looking at DatagramPacket, all of the methods are synchronized.
11 matches
Mail list logo
