On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 20:36:50 GMT, Valeh Hajiyev wrote:
>> This commit addresses the current limitation in the `PriorityQueue`
>> implementation, which lacks a constructor to efficiently create a priority
>> queue with a custom comparator and an existing collection. In order to
>> create such a
On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 20:36:50 GMT, Valeh Hajiyev wrote:
>> This commit addresses the current limitation in the `PriorityQueue`
>> implementation, which lacks a constructor to efficiently create a priority
>> queue with a custom comparator and an existing collection. In order to
>> create such a
On 14/12/2023 10:55, Viktor Klang wrote:
I presume that the precondition to have the original collection be
pre-ordered according to the supplied Comparator can be verified by
checking before adding each element in the collection to the PQ that
it compareTo equal-or-greater to the previous one?
On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 22:18:35 GMT, Valeh Hajiyev wrote:
> @AlanBateman thanks for having a look. would you be able to create a CRS
> request as I don't have permission to do so?
You may not be able to create one, but you sure can look at some. If you do so,
you'll see that obtaining a permissio
On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 20:36:50 GMT, Valeh Hajiyev wrote:
>> This commit addresses the current limitation in the `PriorityQueue`
>> implementation, which lacks a constructor to efficiently create a priority
>> queue with a custom comparator and an existing collection. In order to
>> create such a
One more request – Current PR cannot be merged without CRS. Could someone
please help me to create a CSR request for the issue below?
https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-6356745
Unfortunately, I don't have permission to create a CSR request.
-Valeh
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 9:40 PM Archie Cobbs
Looks great - thanks (I'm not an official reviewer so I can't approve it
though).
-Archie
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 2:37 PM Valeh Hajiyev
wrote:
> Yes, there's no such precondition. Thanks for having a look, I updated the
> javadoc as you suggested, and linked it to the old existing ticket. It's
Yes, there's no such precondition. Thanks for having a look, I updated the
javadoc as you suggested, and linked it to the old existing ticket. It's
now ready for review.
I would appreciate if you could have a look again.
Cheers,
Valeh
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 4:22 PM Archie Cobbs wrote:
> On Th
> This commit addresses the current limitation in the `PriorityQueue`
> implementation, which lacks a constructor to efficiently create a priority
> queue with a custom comparator and an existing collection. In order to create
> such a queue, we currently need to initialize a new queue with cust
---
Commit messages:
- fix styling
- Introduce constructor for PriorityQueue with existing collection and custom
comparator
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17045/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17045&range=00
Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-63
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 4:56 AM Viktor Klang
wrote:
> I presume that the precondition to have the original collection be
> pre-ordered according to the supplied Comparator can be verified by
> checking before adding each element in the collection to the PQ that it
> compareTo equal-or-greater to
Architect, Java Platform Group
Oracle
From: core-libs-dev on behalf of Pavel Rappo
Sent: Thursday, 14 December 2023 10:55
To: Valeh Hajiyev
Cc: core-libs-dev@openjdk.org
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Introduce constructor for PriorityQueue with
existing collection
You might want to use this older, unresolved, duplicated bug for your PR:
https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-6356745
> On 13 Dec 2023, at 23:37, Valeh Hajiyev wrote:
>
> Hi Pavel,
>
> Thanks for the reply. If I understand correctly, I need this change to be
> discussed in one of the mailing
Like David said earlier, this is the correct list. However, given the festive
season, expect some delays in communication.
> On 13 Dec 2023, at 23:37, Valeh Hajiyev wrote:
>
> Hi Pavel,
>
> Thanks for the reply. If I understand correctly, I need this change to be
> discussed in one of the mai
The current mailing list, core-libs-dev, is the correct one.
Cheers,
David
On 14/12/2023 9:37 am, Valeh Hajiyev wrote:
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for the reply. If I understand correctly, I need this change to
be discussed in one of the mailing lists there, so that someone would
sponsor me to create a
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for the reply. If I understand correctly, I need this change to be
discussed in one of the mailing lists there, so that someone would sponsor
me to create a tracking issue in JBS. Do you know which mailing list is the
most relevant for me to propose the change?
Thanks,
Valeh
On
Sorry, there's a necessary process that a PR must follow. You seem to have
signed OCA already. For the rest, see this resource:
https://openjdk.org/guide/. In particular, this part:
https://openjdk.org/guide/#contributing-to-an-openjdk-project.
-Pavel
> On 13 Dec 2023, at 23:09, Valeh Hajiyev
Hi all,
I have raised the following PR, could someone please help me to get it
merged?
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/17045
*More details:*
*This commit addresses the current limitation in the `PriorityQueue`
implementation, which lacks a constructor to efficiently create a prio
18 matches
Mail list logo
