--- Comment #8 from mckinlay at redhat dot com 2006-04-05 18:43 ---
Fix checked in to Classpath HEAD and gcc-4_1_branch
--
mckinlay at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #7 from bryce at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-05 18:41 ---
Subject: Bug 27028
Author: bryce
Date: Wed Apr 5 18:41:17 2006
New Revision: 112714
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=112714
Log:
2006-04-05 Bryce McKinlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR class
--- Comment #6 from mckinlay at redhat dot com 2006-04-05 15:22 ---
*** Bug 24632 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
mckinlay at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
mckinlay at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |mckinlay at redhat dot com
|dot org
--- Comment #5 from mckinlay at redhat dot com 2006-04-05 15:19 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I would argue that Sun's implementation is correct in this case in the
> sense that hasNext() doesn't actually modify anything, only next() does.
Yeah, I agree - although you might get a bogus
--- Comment #4 from rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-05 07:05 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> The difference between Sun's and Classpath's implementation appears to be that
> Classpath will check for Concurrent Modification on both hasNext() and next()
> calls, while Sun's implement
--- Comment #3 from mark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-05 06:38 ---
This might (or might not) be related to bug #24752 although also in that case
it could be argued that the user code is just buggy and should be fixed. See
also bug #24632 which is also similar, but in that case the Axis
