Request for review (XXS): JDK-8004066: TEST_BUG: test/java/lang/Math/ assumes ArithmeticException message

David Holmes david.holmes at
Mon Dec 3 00:47:57 UTC 2012

On 3/12/2012 5:36 AM, Krystal Mo wrote:
> Hi Alan and core-libs-dev,
> Thanks for the review. I've taken your advise and updated the webrev:
> Could you please review the updated version?

If you no longer check the exception message then there's no need to 
modify the exception construction.

I can't help but think we've lost something in making this change though 
- any ArithmeticException will cause the test to pass, when it should 
only be exceptions from divide-by-zero that are ok. :( I don't see any 
way around it though.


> Also, could anybody from the JDK side sponsor this change, please?
> Thanks,
> Kris
> On 12/01/2012 11:54 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> On 30/11/2012 18:48, Krystal Mo wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> Could I get a couple of review for this small change, please?
>>> And could someone from the JDK side sponsor this change?
>>> Bug:
>>> Webrev:
>>> The DivModTest introduced in JDK-6282196 [1] checks the contents of
>>> the exception message, but that message isn't specified in JavaDoc
>>> and thus may vary between VM implementations (or even in the same VM).
>> It looks okay to me, I assume testIntFloorDivMod() could also be
>> changed to create the ArithmeticException with the no-arg constructor
>> as the exception message will no longer be tested.
>> Just a general point, the tests in the jdk repository are not
>> conformance tests and so it is okay (and normal) for these tests to
>> exercise highly implementation-specific behavior. They are expected to
>> be updated and always in sync with the JDK code. Clearly checking
>> exception messages will a bit fragile, more so in this this case as
>> the exception messages are coming from the VM.
>> -Alan.

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list