Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

8257750: writeBuffer field of java.io.DataOutputStream should be final #1627

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

@bplb
Copy link
Member

@bplb bplb commented Dec 4, 2020

Please review this trivial change to make the writeBuffer array field final and move it to the beginning of the class where other fields are declared.


Progress

  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue
  • Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

  • JDK-8257750: writeBuffer field of java.io.DataOutputStream should be final

Reviewers

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/1627/head:pull/1627
$ git checkout pull/1627

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

@bridgekeeper bridgekeeper bot commented Dec 4, 2020

👋 Welcome back bpb! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr label Dec 4, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Dec 4, 2020

@bplb The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • core-libs

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the core-libs label Dec 4, 2020
@mlbridge
Copy link

@mlbridge mlbridge bot commented Dec 4, 2020

Webrevs

naotoj
naotoj approved these changes Dec 4, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Dec 4, 2020

@bplb This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8257750: writeBuffer field of java.io.DataOutputStream should be final

Reviewed-by: lancea, naoto

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 1 new commit pushed to the master branch:

  • d8ac76f: 8257651: LambdaEagerInit.java test failed in 2 different ways

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready label Dec 4, 2020
@bplb
Copy link
Member Author

@bplb bplb commented Dec 4, 2020

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Dec 4, 2020
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated and removed ready rfr labels Dec 4, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Dec 4, 2020

@bplb Since your change was applied there have been 4 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • dd0b945: 8257531: Super word not applied to a loop of simple Buffer operations
  • d76039d: 8257725: No throws of SSLHandshakeException
  • fcc8479: 8257724: Incorrect package of the linked class in BaseSSLSocketImpl
  • d8ac76f: 8257651: LambdaEagerInit.java test failed in 2 different ways

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit e27ea4d.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

@bplb bplb deleted the JDK-8257750-writeBuffer branch Dec 4, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
3 participants