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

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 duplication.

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 http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://openjdk.java.net

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