On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 13:44:27 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
> In the review of the PR for JDK-8322417 it was noted that a fully qualified
> class name "java.util.Arrays" is unnecessary but it was forgotten to clean it
> up prior to integration.
Integrating under trivial rule.
-
PR
On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 13:44:27 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
> In the review of the PR for JDK-8322417 it was noted that a fully qualified
> class name "java.util.Arrays" is unnecessary but it was forgotten to clean it
> up prior to integration.
Looks OK
-
Marked as reviewed by vtew
On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 13:44:27 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
> In the review of the PR for JDK-8322417 it was noted that a fully qualified
> class name "java.util.Arrays" is unnecessary but it was forgotten to clean it
> up prior to integration.
LGTM.
-
Marked as reviewed by mdoerr
On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 13:44:27 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
> In the review of the PR for JDK-8322417 it was noted that a fully qualified
> class name "java.util.Arrays" is unnecessary but it was forgotten to clean it
> up prior to integration.
LGTM
-
Marked as reviewed by goetz (R
On Fri, 29 Dec 2023 13:44:27 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
> In the review of the PR for JDK-8322417 it was noted that a fully qualified
> class name "java.util.Arrays" is unnecessary but it was forgotten to clean it
> up prior to integration.
Marked as reviewed by mbaesken (Reviewer).
---
In the review of the PR for JDK-8322417 it was noted that a fully qualified
class name "java.util.Arrays" is unnecessary but it was forgotten to clean it
up prior to integration.
-
Commit messages:
- JDK-8322417
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17203/files
Webrev: https:
