On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 22:49:11 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 4b21fb9d
Author:Archie Cobbs
URL:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 18:08:56 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
> The bug needs an appropriate `noreg` label (I suggest `noreg-cleanup`).
> Otherwise, looks good to me.
Ah yes, thanks. I've added `noreg-cleanup`. Thanks for the review.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21844#iss
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The pull request now contains 12 commits:
- Merge branch 'master' into SuppressWarnings
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Remove another unnecessary @SuppressWarnings annotation.
-
Changes:
- all:
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The pull request now contains 10 commits:
- Remove another unnecessary @SuppressWarnings annotation.
-
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Remove another unnecessary warning suppression.
-
Changes:
- all:
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The pull request now contains seven commits:
- Merge branch 'master' into SuppressWarnings
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in
by the merge/rebase. The pull request co
On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 15:53:03 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
> Can we find this out? It would be really useful to explain why the warnings
> are no longer an issue.
I haven't checked exhaustively, but all of the ones I've checked appear to be
due to either (a) the warning was never needed, or (b) a sub
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 22:29:47 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
> Can you also explain why the unchecked and serial warning suppressions are no
> longer needed?
Yes and no...
The annoying answer would be: because they no longer suppress any warnings :)
But I think what you're really asking is: how & why
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Revert changes to imported sources.
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openj
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 19:37:41 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
> The files under
> `src/java.xml.crypto/share/classes/com/sun/org/apache/xml/internal/security/`
> and `src/java.xml.crypto/share/classes/org/jcp/xml/dsig/internal/dom` come
> from 3rd party source code where these warnings are still emitted
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations.
Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in
by the merge/rebase. The pull request co
Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
annotations.
-
Commit messages:
- Remove unnecessary @SuppressWarnings annotations.
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21844/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=21844&range=00
Issue
On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 21:28:01 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> > Just curious, since you have access to the secret closed sources, can you
> > not backport these changes yourself? Instead of just deleting them and
> > expecting someone else to rescue them from oblivion?
>
> @archiecobbs we (Oracle) w
On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 04:53:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> The following changes, to javac.1, were never applied to the closed sources
> and are "lost" by this update. These changes will need to be re-applied
> directly in JDK 21 and JDK 22
Just curious, since you have access to the secret closed
16 matches
Mail list logo
