RFR-8008118 (original) (raw)

John Zavgren john.zavgren at oracle.com
Thu Mar 21 18:36:35 UTC 2013

All:

How does this look? 1.) I reverted the for statement formatting change. 2.) I removed the goto statement and "inlined" some code instead. 3.) I checked to make sure that we're not freeing memory that we didn't actually allocate. (Path vector elements that are empty.)

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jzavgren/8008118/webrev.04/

John ----- Original Message ----- From: christos at zoulas.com To: martinrb at google.com, john.zavgren at oracle.com Cc: core-libs-dev at openjdk.java.net Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:00:10 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: RFR-8008118

On Mar 21, 10:10am, martinrb at google.com (Martin Buchholz) wrote: -- Subject: Re: RFR-8008118

| Please revert this formatting change: || - for (q = p; (*q != ':') && (*q != '\0'); q++) | - ; | + for (q = p; (*q != ':') && (*q != '\0'); q++); | + | Stylistically I prefer:

    for (q = p; (*q != ':') && (*q != '\0'); q++)
        continue;

so that re-formatting accidents don't happen, and the intent is clearly communicated.

christos

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list