FYI - The London JUG did have java.util.regex listed, but we didn't
have time to produce a patch for that area, so no clash there -
Cheers, M
On 2 December 2011 12:18, Alan Bateman wrote:
>
> cc'ing core-libs-dev as that is the place to discuss these changes. I see on
> the sign-up sheet [1] that
2, 2011 9:00 AM
> To: Alan Bateman
> Cc: jdk8-...@openjdk.java.net; core-libs-dev
> Subject: Re: Request for Review: Warnings cleanup in java.lang.*,
> java.util.**
>
> Hi,
>
> On 12/02/2011 07:18 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> >
> > cc'ing core-libs-dev as that i
On 12/4/11 7:10 PM, David Schlosnagle wrote:
On Dec 4, 2011, at 7:17 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
I've been mulling over what to do with these two patches for the past couple days.
Initially I was thinking of merging the patches and generating a new one combining the
best of both. But after I loo
On Dec 4, 2011, at 7:17 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
> I've been mulling over what to do with these two patches for the past couple
> days. Initially I was thinking of merging the patches and generating a new
> one combining the best of both. But after I looked over both of them, I felt
> that we s
On 12/2/11 9:00 AM, Omair Majid wrote:
On 12/02/2011 07:18 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
cc'ing core-libs-dev as that is the place to discuss these changes. I
see on the sign-up sheet [1] that omajid has signed up for java.lang,
maybe you are working together?
Unfortunately, David and I were not wor
Hi,
On 12/02/2011 07:18 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
cc'ing core-libs-dev as that is the place to discuss these changes. I
see on the sign-up sheet [1] that omajid has signed up for java.lang,
maybe you are working together?
Unfortunately, David and I were not working together :(
Anyway, here is
cc'ing core-libs-dev as that is the place to discuss these changes. I
see on the sign-up sheet [1] that omajid has signed up for java.lang,
maybe you are working together? I'll leave it to Stuart to say whether
he wants to refactor/other changes separated from the warnings changes.
One thing
