This is the mail archive of the java-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: FYI: Patch: java.util.Hashtable

From: Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org>
To: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at mckinlay dot net dot nz>
Cc: Michael Koch <konqueror at gmx dot de>, GCJ Patches <java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Dalibor Topic <robilad at kaffe dot org>, Jim Pick <jim at kaffe dot org>
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:30:47 +0100
Subject: Re: FYI: Patch: java.util.Hashtable
References: <200312021912.53855.konqueror@gmx.de> <A95999B2-2856-11D8-8789-003065F97F7C@mckinlay.net.nz>

Hi,

On Sun, 2003-12-07 at 02:42, Bryce McKinlay wrote:
> Can you (Jim/Dalibor) explain what this change achieves? I understand 
> reversing the delegation order between contains() & containsValue(), 
> but why add an internal private method? It doesn't affect the 
> overriding behaviour of containsValue() at all - or am I missing 
> something?

No you observation is correct, the delegation to a new internal private
method is not strictly necessary. See for discussion of this patch the
Classpath mailinglist archives, it has seen a couple of iterations:
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/classpath/2003-11/msg00136.html

Cheers,

Mark

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

References:
- FYI: Patch: java.util.Hashtable
  - From: Michael Koch
- Re: FYI: Patch: java.util.Hashtable
  - From: Bryce McKinlay

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]