RFR 7117360: Warnings in java.util.concurrent.atomic package
chris.hegarty at oracle.com
Mon Dec 5 11:45:29 UTC 2011
On 05/12/2011 02:52, David Holmes wrote:
> Thanks Chris and Doug et al. These fixups look good to me too.
> One minor nit:
> The javadoc changes on longValue() changed actual text not just
> formatting. It changes it to be consistent with other methods, but is a
> change none-the-less. Not saying we can't do it, just pointing it out.
Right, since it didn't change the meaning and is more consistent I with
other methods it should fine. But I should have highlighted it in the
I'm not sticking strictly to Stuarts rules I know, just trying to make
life a little easier in the future ;-)
Thanks for the review,
> On 3/12/2011 3:18 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> On 12/ 2/11 04:22 PM, Doug Lea wrote:
>>> We just went through these and others, and believe that everything
>>> is now warning free.
>> Thanks Doug, Wow you guys are quick!
>> I pulled in these specific changes (atomic) and updated the webrev:
>> I'm slowly working through the j.u.c.* classes and hope to have a webrev
>> out next week.
More information about the core-libs-dev