> Added the test case, and eliminated the immediate hashmap value, replaced
> with the ordinal number of `Character.UnicodeScript.UNKNOWN`.
Naoto Sato has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The pull request now contains 29 commits:
- Merge branch 'maste
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 22:27:20 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote:
>> Added the test case, and eliminated the immediate hashmap value, replaced
>> with the ordinal number of `Character.UnicodeScript.UNKNOWN`.
>
> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last
On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 18:41:59 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
> 8186958: Need method to create pre-sized HashMap
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 87faa85c
Author:XenoAmess
Committer: Stuart Marks
URL:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/87faa85c59e94d66c3c61d997eacdd2
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 21:27:16 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8186958: Need method to create pre-sized HashMap
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> java.xml.crypto's usage downgrade grammar to 1.8
I've also written a relea
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 21:27:16 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8186958: Need method to create pre-sized HashMap
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> java.xml.crypto's usage downgrade grammar to 1.8
Marked as reviewed by sma
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 19:34:33 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> People rarely include JDK elements with package access in a javadoc run. That
> is why bugs in those elements' doc comments tend to remain unnoticed.
>
> There are many more bugs in the doc comments of the JDK elements with the
> package a
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 20:16:38 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>>> Are the changes necessary for this part?
>>
>> @seanjmullan no, they are just performance refinement.
>>
>> If you really that wanna 100% sync ,
>>
>> I can use the old 1.8 api to migrate that part, and make a mirror pr to that
>> part
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 20:16:38 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>>> Are the changes necessary for this part?
>>
>> @seanjmullan no, they are just performance refinement.
>>
>> If you really that wanna 100% sync ,
>>
>> I can use the old 1.8 api to migrate that part, and make a mirror pr to that
>> part
