You are right. I was just being lazy. Update webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sla/8003671/webrev.01/
Thanks, /Staffan On 29 apr 2013, at 15:43, Rickard Bäckman <rickard.back...@oracle.com> wrote: > 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 >>> >> >
