Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>
>
> Nathan Beyer wrote:
>> 1. Javadoc - Yeah, I didn't know what was the right thing to do in
>> regards
>> to the javadoc. It wasn't 100% copy and paste, but the class-level and
>> some
>> of the methods were pulled. My thought was that if we're considering the
>> Java
Nathan Beyer wrote:
1. Javadoc - Yeah, I didn't know what was the right thing to do in regards
to the javadoc. It wasn't 100% copy and paste, but the class-level and some
of the methods were pulled. My thought was that if we're considering the
Javadoc as the specification for the interface, the
gain,
Tim
p.s. send more code ;-)
> [1]
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/serialized-form.html#java.lang.Strin
> gBuilder
> [2]
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/serialized-form.html#java.lang.Strin
> gBuffer
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ti
ilder
[2]
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/api/serialized-form.html#java.lang.Strin
gBuffer
-Original Message-
From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 3:09 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [jira] Resolved: (HARMONY-103) java.la
Nathan,
First, let me say a big thank you for the code and tests you submitted.
I've had a chance to read through it and (beyond the comments below) it
looks good.
I've committed a modified version of your patch to SVN. However, ;-)
1. I've removed the javadoc comments as these appear to be d
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-103?page=all ]
Tim Ellison resolved HARMONY-103:
-
Resolution: Fixed
Nathan,
Thanks for the patch, it has been applied (minus javadoc) at repo revision
379882.
Please check that it has been applied as
