On 19/10/2016 12:27 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
On 10/17/16 9:59 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Lois, Dan, Serguei,
Went to push this today and realized I had left off the updated JNI
method lookup tests. As I said in the bug report JNI behaves as
expected, but there weren't any testcases so I a
Thanks Lois!
David
On 18/10/2016 10:06 PM, Lois Foltan wrote:
Looks good David!
Lois
On 10/17/2016 11:59 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Lois, Dan, Serguei,
Went to push this today and realized I had left off the updated JNI
method lookup tests. As I said in the bug report JNI behaves as
expected
On 10/17/16 9:59 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Lois, Dan, Serguei,
Went to push this today and realized I had left off the updated JNI
method lookup tests. As I said in the bug report JNI behaves as
expected, but there weren't any testcases so I added them:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8
Looks good David!
Lois
On 10/17/2016 11:59 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Lois, Dan, Serguei,
Went to push this today and realized I had left off the updated JNI
method lookup tests. As I said in the bug report JNI behaves as
expected, but there weren't any testcases so I added them:
http://cr.
Thanks Serguei!
David
On 18/10/2016 5:10 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
David,
It looks good.
Thanks,
Serguei
On 10/17/16 20:59, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Lois, Dan, Serguei,
Went to push this today and realized I had left off the updated JNI
method lookup tests. As I said in the bug
David,
It looks good.
Thanks,
Serguei
On 10/17/16 20:59, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Lois, Dan, Serguei,
Went to push this today and realized I had left off the updated JNI
method lookup tests. As I said in the bug report JNI behaves as
expected, but there weren't any testcases so I added them:
Hi Lois, Dan, Serguei,
Went to push this today and realized I had left off the updated JNI
method lookup tests. As I said in the bug report JNI behaves as
expected, but there weren't any testcases so I added them:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8165827/webrev.hotspot/
Thanks,
David
On
On 10/11/16 20:28, David Holmes wrote:
On 12/10/2016 1:02 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
On 10/11/16 19:50, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Serguei,
Thanks for looking at this.
On 12/10/2016 12:37 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi David,
It looks good, thank you for test improvements.
On 12/10/2016 1:02 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
On 10/11/16 19:50, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Serguei,
Thanks for looking at this.
On 12/10/2016 12:37 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi David,
It looks good, thank you for test improvements.
One minor comment.
http://cr.openjdk.j
On 10/11/16 19:50, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Serguei,
Thanks for looking at this.
On 12/10/2016 12:37 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi David,
It looks good, thank you for test improvements.
One minor comment.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8165827/webrev/test/com/sun/jdi/Interface
Hi Serguei,
Thanks for looking at this.
On 12/10/2016 12:37 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi David,
It looks good, thank you for test improvements.
One minor comment.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8165827/webrev/test/com/sun/jdi/InterfaceMethodsTest.java.frames.html
511 privat
Hi David,
It looks good, thank you for test improvements.
One minor comment.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8165827/webrev/test/com/sun/jdi/InterfaceMethodsTest.java.frames.html
511 private Method testLookup(ReferenceType targetClass, String
methodName, String methodSig,
512 boolean d
On 10/11/16 3:11 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Dan,
Thanks for looking at this.
On 12/10/2016 3:30 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
On 10/10/16 7:55 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Turns out the only place changes were needed were in JDI.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165827
webrev: htt
Hi Dan,
Thanks for looking at this.
On 12/10/2016 3:30 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
On 10/10/16 7:55 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Turns out the only place changes were needed were in JDI.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165827
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8165827/w
On 10/10/16 7:55 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Turns out the only place changes were needed were in JDI.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165827
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8165827/webrev/
src/jdk.jdi/share/classes/com/sun/jdi/ObjectReference.java
No comments. (Tha
Thanks for looking at this Lois!
David
On 11/10/2016 9:48 PM, Lois Foltan wrote:
Hi David,
This looks good and I like the improvements you made to the test.
Lois
On 10/10/2016 9:55 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Turns out the only place changes were needed were in JDI.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.jav
Hi David,
This looks good and I like the improvements you made to the test.
Lois
On 10/10/2016 9:55 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Turns out the only place changes were needed were in JDI.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165827
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8165827/webrev
Turns out the only place changes were needed were in JDI.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165827
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8165827/webrev/
The spec change in ObjectReference is very simple and there is a CCC
request in progress to ratify that change.
The impl
18 matches
Mail list logo
