On 27 Apr 2016, at 20:13, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 27/04/2016 10:04, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> On 26 Apr 2016, at 18:21, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>
>>> I took a second pass over it. One thing that I'm wondering about is whether
>>> BaseExtendedSocketOptions + Support should be collapsed into one abs
On 27/04/2016 10:04, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 26 Apr 2016, at 18:21, Alan Bateman wrote:
I took a second pass over it. One thing that I'm wondering about is whether
BaseExtendedSocketOptions + Support should be collapsed into one abstract class
ExtendedSocketOptions (or better name) with 3
> On Apr 27, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>
>
> On 27 Apr 2016, at 17:27, Mandy Chung wrote:
>
>>
>>> On Apr 27, 2016, at 2:04 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>>>
>>> This works out quite nice. Webrev updated in-place:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8044773/jdk/
>>
>> One com
On 27 Apr 2016, at 17:27, Mandy Chung wrote:
>
>> On Apr 27, 2016, at 2:04 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>>
>> This works out quite nice. Webrev updated in-place:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8044773/jdk/
>
> One comment on the qualified exports of sun.security.action.GetPropertyAction
> On Apr 27, 2016, at 2:04 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>
> This works out quite nice. Webrev updated in-place:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8044773/jdk/
One comment on the qualified exports of sun.security.action.GetPropertyAction
to jdk.net module. This is a simple utility method used
On 26 Apr 2016, at 18:21, Alan Bateman wrote:
> I took a second pass over it. One thing that I'm wondering about is whether
> BaseExtendedSocketOptions + Support should be collapsed into one abstract
> class ExtendedSocketOptions (or better name) with 3 instance methods and 2
> static methods
On 26/04/2016 10:16, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 26 Apr 2016, at 09:20, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 25/04/2016 22:01, Chris Hegarty wrote:
One of the remaining open issues in JEP 200 [1] is that the base module
exports the jdk.net package, thereby violating Principle 4 of JEP 200:
a Java SE module m
Thanks, looks good!
/Erik
On 2016-04-26 12:02, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 26 Apr 2016, at 10:57, Erik Joelsson wrote:
On 2016-04-26 11:51, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 26 Apr 2016, at 10:35, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Hello Chris,
In general it looks good.
Thanks for the review Erik.
Just a coupl
On 26 Apr 2016, at 10:57, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>
>
> On 2016-04-26 11:51, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> On 26 Apr 2016, at 10:35, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Chris,
>>>
>>> In general it looks good.
>> Thanks for the review Erik.
>>
>>> Just a couple style [1] nits that I would like to get
On 2016-04-26 11:57, Erik Joelsson wrote:
On 2016-04-26 11:51, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 26 Apr 2016, at 10:35, Erik Joelsson
wrote:
Hello Chris,
In general it looks good.
Thanks for the review Erik.
Just a couple style [1] nits that I would like to get sorted. In
Lib-jdk.net.gmk, the
On 2016-04-26 11:51, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 26 Apr 2016, at 10:35, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Hello Chris,
In general it looks good.
Thanks for the review Erik.
Just a couple style [1] nits that I would like to get sorted. In
Lib-jdk.net.gmk, the arguments to SetupNativeCompilation should be
On 26 Apr 2016, at 10:35, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Hello Chris,
>
> In general it looks good.
Thanks for the review Erik.
> Just a couple style [1] nits that I would like to get sorted. In
> Lib-jdk.net.gmk, the arguments to SetupNativeCompilation should be indented 4
> spaces relative to the
Hello Chris,
In general it looks good. Just a couple style [1] nits that I would like
to get sorted. In Lib-jdk.net.gmk, the arguments to
SetupNativeCompilation should be indented 4 spaces relative to the call
(continuation). Also line 32 and 45 needs a space after comma.
/Erik
[1] http://o
On 26 Apr 2016, at 09:20, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 25/04/2016 22:01, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> One of the remaining open issues in JEP 200 [1] is that the base module
>> exports the jdk.net package, thereby violating Principle 4 of JEP 200:
>> a Java SE module must not export any non-SE API package
On 25/04/2016 22:01, Chris Hegarty wrote:
One of the remaining open issues in JEP 200 [1] is that the base module
exports the jdk.net package, thereby violating Principle 4 of JEP 200:
a Java SE module must not export any non-SE API packages without
qualification.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~c
One of the remaining open issues in JEP 200 [1] is that the base module
exports the jdk.net package, thereby violating Principle 4 of JEP 200:
a Java SE module must not export any non-SE API packages without
qualification.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8044773/
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/b
16 matches
Mail list logo
