[PATCH 1/1] Get rid of synchronization in java.util.logging.LogRecord constructor

Andrew John Hughes gnu_andrew at member.fsf.org
Fri Mar 13 00:16:19 UTC 2009

2009/3/13 David M. Lloyd <david.lloyd at redhat.com>:
> On 03/12/2009 07:01 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote:
>> David M. Lloyd wrote:
>>> On 03/12/2009 05:41 PM, Mark Reinhold wrote:
>>>> You might want to have a look at the new contribution process [1].
>>>> Using that will increase the probability that someone will evaluate
>>>> your patch sooner rather than later.
>>>> - Mark
>>>> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/contribute
>>> Consider my post to be step 2 of that process.  The patch itself is
>>> probably the most succinct way of expressing the proposed change (it
>>> only took a minute or two to write in any case).
>> That's understandable, but it's a lot easier to find interesting patches
>> to review in a bug tracker, then to search for them among mailing list
>> threads.
> [...]
> OK, that's reasonable.  Perhaps Step 2 should be switched with Step 3 then
> on the "contribute" page to make it match up then?

I think it's more the case that step 2 is unnecessary for such a
specific case.  It applies more to a situation where the
implementation would take a significant amount of time, such that it
should first be discussed to avoid wasted time and/or work

>> It seems that the change would break serialization, by changing the type
>> of a serialized field (in both classes) away from a primitive one. See
>> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/platform/serialization/spec/version.html
>> for details.
> The fields are static so it shouldn't matter.
> - DML

Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK

PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list