Code Review Request for Bug #5035850
david.holmes at oracle.com
Mon Nov 21 01:31:37 UTC 2011
On 21/11/2011 5:39 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
> On 11/20/2011 08:14 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> On 18/11/2011 18:27, Darryl Mocek wrote:
>>> Hello. Please review this patch to fix a serialization issue with
>>> String's CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER. If you serialize, then deserialize
>>> the class, the equals test will fail in the comparison of what was
>>> serialized with what was deserialized. Webrev, including test, can be
>>> found here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/darryl/5035850/webrev
>> This looks okay to me but I would suggest adding a comment to
>> readResolve, maybe something like "Replaces the de-serialized object"
>> as the causal reader may not know what this method is for.
> Hi Darryl, Hi Alan,
> additional comments: in the test, you don't need to initialize result to
> null because you can remove the catch(Exception) block
Related to this I was going to say that if you get an unexpected
exception I believe you should simply let it propagate to indicate failure.
> and also you should use == instead of equals for the last check.
Given equals() is not overridden the two are equivalent. But testing
both as Mike suggests would catch any erroneous redefinition of equals()
in the future.
More information about the core-libs-dev