<Swing Dev> [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] <AWT Dev> JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8032047: Fix static lint warnings in client libraries

[Joe Darcy]

Hi Sergey,

On 01/17/2014 02:28 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
> Hello, Joe.
> Some comments:
>  - in the SunDropTargetContextPeer.java file header changed only

Reverted.

>  - Incorrect modification of if statement in D3DSurfaceDataProxy.java

Fixed.

>  - It is not necessary to use class name in  StyledEditorKit.java and 
> HTMLEditorKit.java, because defaultActions is a private static field 
> and it can be accessed directly.

Improved.

New webrev:

     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8032047.2

Thanks for the review,

-Joe

>
> On 17.01.2014 11:31, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> Hi Petr,
>>
>> On 01/16/2014 11:20 PM, Petr Pchelko wrote:
>>> Hello, Joe.
>>>
>>> A couple of small comments:
>>>
>>> AffineTransformOp.java: Could you please split a long line #241
>>
>> Done.
>>
>>>
>>> ClipboardTransferable.java: You can safely remove the 
>>> DataTransferer.getInstance in this place.
>>> The DataTransferer is a singleton and it's already created by this 
>>> time.
>>>
>>> SunDragSourceContextPeer.java: same here, you can safely remove the 
>>> getInstance
>>
>> Changed.
>>
>>>
>>> D3DDrawImage.java: you've mistyped the copyright update.
>>
>> Fixed.
>>
>>>
>>> D3DSurfaceDataProxy.java: Why did you choose to suppress a warning 
>>> here? the getD3DDevice is
>>> just a getter, it does not allocate new object and has no side 
>>> effects..
>>
>> Changed.
>>
>> Revised webrev at
>>
>>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8032047.0/
>>
>> Thanks for the careful review,
>>
>> -Joe
>>
>>>
>>> With best regards. Petr.
>>>
>>> On 17.01.2014, at 10:55, Joe Darcy <joe.darcy at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> Please view my proposed fix for
>>>>
>>>>     JDK-8032047: Fix static lint warnings in client libraries
>>>>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8032047.0/
>>>>
>>>> Mostly this fix consisted of just replacing a variable name with 
>>>> the class name mentioned by javac in the warning message. In a few 
>>>> cases where the expression allocated a new object, I choose to just 
>>>> suppress the warning since I didn't feel motivated to analyze the 
>>>> possible side-effects of the allocation.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> -Joe
>>>>
>>
>
>