RFR 8005696: Add CompletableFuture - JEP 155

[Chris Hegarty]

On 03/19/2013 05:18 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> Sorry, just finished one more (final?) round of exception spec updates,
> notably to change "unchecked exception" to "exception", since the code
> catches any Throwable.

Thanks Martin, my fault I suggested "unchecked". I also like the 
additional clarification for XXXEither. I'll grab this update, and 
consider it final ;-)

-Chris.

>
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Chris Hegarty <chris.hegarty at oracle.com
> <mailto:chris.hegarty at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>     Updated specdiff and webrev. Unless I hear otherwise, I think the
>     API is as good as final.
>
>
>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~__chegar/8005696/ver.01/__specdiff/java/util/concurrent/__package-summary.html
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8005696/ver.01/specdiff/java/util/concurrent/package-summary.html>
>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~__chegar/8005696/ver.01/webrev/
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8005696/ver.01/webrev/>
>
>     -Chris
>
>
>     On 03/18/2013 02:10 PM, Doug Lea wrote:
>
>         On 03/15/13 09:43, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>
>             On 15/03/2013 12:00, Doug Lea wrote:
>
>                 Yes, thanks! This keeps the exception specs consistent
>                 across similar
>                 methods.
>
>
>             Now that I reread these method descriptions, I think
>             thenAcceptBothXXX
>             suffer
>             the same problem:
>
>
>         Yes; thanks. And also a few other cases of non-symmetric doc/code
>         constructions. Martin and I (thanks Martin!) did a couple of passes
>         to try to hit them all. (Chris: maybe you could resync with CVS?)
>
>         The slogan for this class is: We write all the variants
>         so users never have to. Some of the variants were added during a
>         set of exchanges on concurrency-interest list last fall, which
>         let some gratuitous differences creep in.
>
>         -Doug
>
>
>
>