Actually, even better alternatives are Arrays.copyOf or array.clone(); /R
On Apr 29, 2013, at 3:15 PM, Rickard Bäckman wrote: > Staffan, > > the change looks good, however I would be happy if we actually used the > arraycopy instead :) > > /R > > On Apr 29, 2013, at 2:43 PM, Staffan Larsen wrote: > >> >> On 29 apr 2013, at 14:15, Dmitry Samersoff <dmitry.samers...@oracle.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Staffan, >>> >>> 1. bug is not available (yet?) on bugs.sun.com >> >> It'll probably take a couple of hours (as usual). >> >>> 2. you probably can use arraycopy routine. >> >> I could, but I stuck to the same code as was already in the class. It's not >> performance critical. >> >> /Staffan >> >>> >>> -Dmitry >>> >>> On 2013-04-29 14:54, Staffan Larsen wrote: >>>> Please review the following small fix to avoid exposing an internal >>>> representation. >>>> >>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8003671/webrev.00/ >>>> bug: http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=8003671 >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> /Staffan >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dmitry Samersoff >>> Oracle Java development team, Saint Petersburg, Russia >>> * Give Rabbit time, and he'll always get the answer >> >
