Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28674&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 06:21:08 +
Finished at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 06:24:32 +
Total time: 3m 24s
Build Trigger: Schedu
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28671&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 05:21:17 +
Finished at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 05:24:39 +
Total time: 3m 22s
Build Trigger: Schedu
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28668&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 04:21:12 +
Finished at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 04:24:19 +
Total time: 3m 6s
Build Trigger: Schedul
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28665&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 03:21:03 +
Finished at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 03:24:25 +
Total time: 3m 22s
Build Trigger: Schedu
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28662&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 02:21:16 +
Finished at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 02:24:35 +
Total time: 3m 19s
Build Trigger: Schedu
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28659&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 01:21:16 +
Finished at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 01:24:38 +
Total time: 3m 21s
Build Trigger: Schedu
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28656&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 00:33:09 +
Finished at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 00:36:36 +
Total time: 3m 26s
Build Trigger: Forced
I'm gradually working my way through the test failures that occur on Continuum.
The FileDiskCacheUnitTest was failing because the tests were dependent
on the file timestamp resolution, so the cache did not always treat
the first created file as the oldest.
Adding pauses as necessary fixed this.
I
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28655&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 00:21:04 +
Finished at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 00:24:25 +
Total time: 3m 20s
Build Trigger: Schedu
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28654&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 00:10:33 +
Finished at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 00:13:59 +
Total time: 3m 26s
Build Trigger: Forced
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28651&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous Build: No previous build.
Started at: Thu 3 Apr 2014 23:57:28 +
Finished at: Fri 4 Apr 2014 00:00:38 +
Total time: 3m 10s
Build Tri
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28650&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Thu 3 Apr 2014 23:29:10 +
Finished at: Thu 3 Apr 2014 23:32:37 +
Total time: 3m 27s
Build Trigger: Forced
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28649&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Thu 3 Apr 2014 23:08:40 +
Finished at: Thu 3 Apr 2014 23:12:04 +
Total time: 3m 23s
Build Trigger: Forced
Online report :
https://continuum-ci.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=28646&projectId=286
Build statistics:
State: Failed
Previous State: Failed
Started at: Thu 3 Apr 2014 22:47:01 +
Finished at: Thu 3 Apr 2014 22:50:11 +
Total time: 3m 10s
Build Trigger: Forced
I'm bummed. One of my interview torture questions was whether this compiles.
class _ {
static _ _ ;
_() {
}
_(_ _) {
}
}
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2014-04-03, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
>
> >
> http://openjdk.5641.n7.nabble.com/Warning-about-single-undersc
Hi,
I was planning to contribute to the bu2 project and thought fixing
checkstyle errors should be a good start to it.
I ran the mvn checkstyle:checkstyle command to generate the report which
ended up showing 3218 errors. I wanted to know if all the errors needs to
fixed or only few specific ones.
On 4/3/14, 12:46 AM, Mark Thomas wrote:
> On 02/04/2014 22:58, Phil Steitz wrote:
>> It looks to me like v 2 pools are no longer fair in the sense of
>> 1.5.x (modulo lucky threads getting to wait on creates). I agree
>> that the default should be no fairness constraint, but it might be
>> good to
On 2014-04-03, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> http://openjdk.5641.n7.nabble.com/Warning-about-single-underscore-identifier-td145974.html
They are deprecating the use of "_" for method argument names so that
one day I may be able to use it for the exact same purpose I've done so
for :-)
Stefan
On 3 April 2014 12:11, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> Hi sebb,
>
>
> 2014-04-03 2:16 GMT+02:00 :
>
>> Author: sebb
>> Date: Thu Apr 3 00:16:40 2014
>> New Revision: 1584225
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1584225
>> Log:
>> Tidy up
>>
>> Modified:
>>
>> commons/proper/jcs/trunk/src/test/org/apache/co
My rules of optimization :)
#1 rule of optimization: don't do it.
#2 rule: profile it, then don't do it.
#3 rule: profile it, discuss it, maybe do it.
Better source for rules of optimization:
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?RulesOfOptimization
Gary
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote
I found this explanation from Brian Goetz:
http://openjdk.5641.n7.nabble.com/Warning-about-single-underscore-identifier-td145974.html
"Yes, we are "reclaiming" the syntactic real estate of "_" from the
space of identifiers for use in future language features. However,
because there are existing
SCXML developers,
I've just created the second Commons SCXML 2.0-M1 milestone tag on the roadmap
towards Commons SCXML 2.0 [1].
This milestone incorporates some major (and drastic) changes, and completely
replaces the old SCXMLSemantics with a new implementation which now is fully
compliant
Hi sebb,
2014-04-03 2:16 GMT+02:00 :
> Author: sebb
> Date: Thu Apr 3 00:16:40 2014
> New Revision: 1584225
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1584225
> Log:
> Tidy up
>
> Modified:
>
> commons/proper/jcs/trunk/src/test/org/apache/commons/jcs/utils/struct/LRUMapConcurrentTest.java
>
> commons/prop
On 2014-04-03, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> 2014-04-03 12:05 GMT+02:00 Stefan Bodewig :
>> On 2014-04-03, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>>> I didn't now that '_' is a valid identifier at all.
>> That's a different point. :-)
>> _ is used as an identifier in many funtional languages to mean "any
>> argume
2014-04-03 12:05 GMT+02:00 Stefan Bodewig :
> On 2014-04-03, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>
> > I didn't now that '_' is a valid identifier at all.
>
> That's a different point. :-)
>
> _ is used as an identifier in many funtional languages to mean "any
> argument, I don't care for it anyway" when you n
On 2014-04-03, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 03/04/2014 10:27, Stefan Bodewig a écrit :
>> why is Java8 complaining?
> I don't know, it says '_' is deprecated and may become illegal in the
> future. I guess '_' may be used for a new language feature.
OK, thanks, didn't know that. I've by noe foun
On 2014-04-03, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> I didn't now that '_' is a valid identifier at all.
That's a different point. :-)
_ is used as an identifier in many funtional languages to mean "any
argument, I don't care for it anyway" when you need to have an argument
for a certain contract but won't u
Le 03/04/2014 10:27, Stefan Bodewig a écrit :
> why is Java8 complaining?
I don't know, it says '_' is deprecated and may become illegal in the
future. I guess '_' may be used for a new language feature.
Emmanuel Bourg
-
To un
2014-04-03 10:27 GMT+02:00 Stefan Bodewig :
> On 2014-04-03, wrote:
>
> > Don't use '_' as an identifier to avoid a compiler warning with Java 8
>
> why is Java8 complaining?
>
I didn't now that '_' is a valid identifier at all.
>
> Stefan
>
> --
On 2014-04-03, wrote:
> Don't use '_' as an identifier to avoid a compiler warning with Java 8
why is Java8 complaining?
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-
On 02/04/2014 22:58, Phil Steitz wrote:
> It looks to me like v 2 pools are no longer fair in the sense of
> 1.5.x (modulo lucky threads getting to wait on creates). I agree
> that the default should be no fairness constraint, but it might be
> good to make this configurable. This looks doable wi
On 3 April 2014 07:39, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> we have discussed this before. Thanks to Niall, all the JavaDoc issues are
> now resolved, so I'm hoping to find the time this weekend to roll out an
> RC.
>
> There is one issue that we could consider for inclusion: LANG-990 - Avoid
> St
32 matches
Mail list logo
