> On 21 Nov 2016, at 20:57, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>
> Looks good to me!
+1
-Chris.
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Paul Sandoz
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please review specification clarifications to PriorityQueue and
>> PriorityBlockingQueue for the spliterator. Ordinarily i would not s
On 11/21/2016 03:52 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi,
Please review specification clarifications to PriorityQueue and
PriorityBlockingQueue for the spliterator. Ordinarily i would not specify what
spliterator characteristics are not reported, but in this case given what is
said about iterator I thin
Looks good to me!
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Paul Sandoz
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please review specification clarifications to PriorityQueue and
> PriorityBlockingQueue for the spliterator. Ordinarily i would not specify
> what spliterator characteristics are not reported, but in this case given
Hi,
Please review specification clarifications to PriorityQueue and
PriorityBlockingQueue for the spliterator. Ordinarily i would not specify what
spliterator characteristics are not reported, but in this case given what is
said about iterator I think it reasonable to say it about spliterator (