Claes Redestad claes.redestad at oracle.com
Sun Sep 6 19:37:53 UTC 2015



bug database cleanup workflow: I guess raising the issue on the
appropriate mailing list (which for j.u.Formatter happens to be
core-libs-dev) and getting someone on that list with write access to
JBS to review and update the bug is as good as any.

Knowing which mailing list to post to surely isn't obvious, and there's
plenty to choose from[1]. You should also read the guide on how to
contribute[2] and make sure you or your company have signed the
OCA (see [2]) so that we can accept code contributions from you.

As you say, this looks pretty clear-cut: the empty Object[] gets passed
in as the varargs array, which then throws a
MissingFormatArgumentException since fewer arguments then
the specifier is provided, all according to the Formatter javadoc spec.
I'll update and close the bug. Thanks!


[1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net
[2] http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/

On 09/06/2015 08:47 PM, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
> Hi,
> i am looking through same bug-reports for some low hanging fruits and I
> found JDK-7198513[1] ,
> which seems to be a reporting failure. The Formatter works as excepted.
> The reported made a
> small mistake and used the empty ObjectArray without any case, so it is
> used as the var-arg
> parameter (with zero elements).
> I think this bug can be closed.
> I tested the following on 1.6.0_35, 1.7.0_79 and 1.8.0_45 and it always
> produces the same
> expected result.
> public class FormatterTest {
>      public static void main(String[] args) {
>          System.out.println(String.format("%d,%b", 42, new Object[] {}));
>          System.out.println(String.format("%b", (Object) new Object[] {}));
>          try {
>              System.out.println(String.format("%b", new Object[] {}));
>              System.out.println("There is something rotten in state of
> Denmark");
>          } catch (MissingFormatArgumentException e) {
>              System.out.println("Works as expected");
>          }
>      }
> }
> Result:
> 42,true
> true
> Works as expected
> What is the preferred workflow for such a bug-database cleanup? Is it
> through the mailing list?
> -- Sebastian
> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7198513

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list