On Mon, 23 Aug 2021 21:01:48 GMT, Andrey Turbanov
wrote:
> Collections.sort is just a wrapper, so it is better to use an instance method
> directly.
java/net and sun/net changes LGTM
-
Marked as reviewed by dfuchs (Reviewer).
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/5229
On Mon, 23 Aug 2021 21:01:48 GMT, Andrey Turbanov
wrote:
> Collections.sort is just a wrapper, so it is better to use an instance method
> directly.
There are a bunch of calls to `Collections.sort()` without a comparator
specified (at least in java.desktop):
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/b
On Sun, 22 Aug 2021 23:02:06 GMT, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
>> This is the continuation of JDK-8233884, JDK-8271456, and JDK-8272120.
>>
>> In many places standard charsets are looked up via their names, for example:
>> absolutePath.getBytes("UTF-8");
>>
>> This could be done more efficiently(up t
On Thu, 8 Jul 2021 10:38:33 GMT, Sergei Ustimenko
wrote:
> This patch replaces a LinkedList data structure used in the
> net.http.FilterFactory class with an ArrayList. This issue relates to
> [JDK-8246048: Replace LinkedList with ArrayLists in
> java.net.](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/brows
On Mon, 23 Aug 2021 21:01:48 GMT, Andrey Turbanov
wrote:
> Collections.sort is just a wrapper, so it is better to use an instance method
> directly.
java.time changes look good.
-
Marked as reviewed by naoto (Reviewer).
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/5229
> Collections.sort is just a wrapper, so it is better to use an instance method
> directly.
Andrey Turbanov has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
8272863: Replace usages of Collections.sort with List.sort call in public
java modules
On Tue, 24 Aug 2021 11:48:46 GMT, Alexander Zvegintsev
wrote:
> Is there any reason to not touch them along with this fix?
Update them too.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/5229
On 8/23/21, Alex Kashchenko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 8/13/21, Michael McMahon wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> A question about this issue. Can you explain why the server/proxy is
>> sending a response body to a HEAD request?
>>
>> My reading of the RFCs suggests this is not allowed.
>
> Thanks for your comment an
