> I still need an official reviewer.
Thanks for looking into this, I was going check into it today if you
didn't. I figured it must be something in byte comparison. Sure enough.
Good catches! :) That code's been in there a long time!
Only nit is Copyright Dates if you choose to update.
Rest looks good.
Brad
On 5/6/2014 6:43 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
On 5/6/2014 9:39 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 05/06/2014 03:37 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
On 5/6/2014 9:31 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 05/06/2014 02:00 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Storing both int version and major/minor byte versions is a little bit
redundancy. The update is significant. I will focus on the signed
byte
issue in this fix.
Yes, I get that. I've verified that you've covered all the version
comparisons.
Thanks for the code review. Do you have a OpenJDK author account?
I'm not an official reviewer, I'm afraid.
I will your name in a "also reviewed by" section. I still need an
official reviewer.
Thanks,
Xuelei
