RFR 7118066: Warnings in java.util.concurrent package

Doug Lea dl at cs.oswego.edu
Wed Dec 7 01:33:58 UTC 2011

Thanks for all the comments. We changed to having the
annotations on their own lines (even though it furthers
the Java tendency of gratuitously occupying too much vertical
space :-).  Thanks to Chris for explaining why we didn't
incorporate some of the other suggestions.

Also ...

>> - you added:
>> * @param s the stream
>> for readObject, but not for writeObject. Seems unnecessary for either.
> Right, this is obviously not public API and does seem unnecessary. This is just
> a minor style/comment nit to be consistent with other j.u.c. classes. But now I
> see there are a few other readObject methods that are not consistent too ( as
> well as some writeObjects ). If it's ok we can catch these at another time?

Yes, one of these days we should uniformly just remove them all.


More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list