RFR 7118066: Warnings in java.util.concurrent package (original) (raw)

David Holmes david.holmes at oracle.com
Wed Dec 7 06:04:48 UTC 2011

Thanks Doug and Chris.

They were just nits so it is fine to proceed - thanks for changing the annotations though.

David

On 7/12/2011 11:33 AM, Doug Lea wrote:

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. -Doug

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list