Perhaps the authors in question would be happy to have a publicly hosted
snippet of that useful information? I have both books but can appreciate
that there's a *large* number of Java devs who can't afford or get access
to those.
Cheers,
Martijn
On 29 January 2015 at 21:03, Roger Riggs wrote:
On 01/29/2015 09:53 PM, joe darcy wrote:
> + * As much as is reasonably practical, the hashCode method defined
> + * by class {@code Object} does return distinct integers for
> + * distinct objects. (The hashCode may or may not be implemented
> + * as some function of an object's me
I don't think that usage would be inappropriate, but I don't think it is
called for here either.
Thanks,
-Joe
On 1/29/2015 1:01 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
Would it be appropriate to put the parenthetic information in the new
lines 91-93 in an @implSpec or other such section?
Brian
On Jan
Hi Joe,
Looks fine (though I don't have the books to verify the references).
Roger
On 1/29/2015 3:53 PM, joe darcy wrote:
Hello,
Please review a few doc updates for java.lang.Object:
JDK-8071434: doc updates for java.lang.Object
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8071434.0/
Patch be
Would it be appropriate to put the parenthetic information in the new lines
91-93 in an @implSpec or other such section?
Brian
On Jan 29, 2015, at 12:53 PM, joe darcy wrote:
> Please review a few doc updates for java.lang.Object:
>
> JDK-8071434: doc updates for java.lang.Object
>http
Hello,
Please review a few doc updates for java.lang.Object:
JDK-8071434: doc updates for java.lang.Object
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8071434.0/
Patch below.
Thanks,
-Joe
--- old/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Object.java 2015-01-29
12:50:41.099429597 -0800
+++ new/sr
