RFR: JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

Roger Riggs Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com
Wed Oct 5 21:05:21 UTC 2016


I would leave the test and code as is for the purposes of 8133273
and leave it to later to resolve 8167222.  There is no compelling need 
to change it.

$.02, Roger

On 10/5/2016 4:45 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
> Stephen,
> Thanks for the quick followup clarifications. I'm not entirely sure 
> how you'd like to proceed; see discussion below.
> Jonathan, also see below.
> On 10/5/16 9:07 AM, Jonathan Bluett-Duncan wrote:
>> Stuart, thank you very much for your continued review of this 
>> changeset, and for
>> finding those usages of CookieManager::get in Grepcode for me. I've 
>> applied the
>> comment you suggested for ModuleFinder and I've also fixed the
>> NetscapeCookieStore typo.
> Great!
>> Stephen, thank you for getting back about DateTimeFormatter. It's not 
>> clear to
>> me what should be done with
>> TCKDateTimeFormatter::test_resolverFields_listOfOneNull in this case. 
>> Do I
>> delete it; or do I change it to test that a null TemporalField param 
>> causes a
>> NullPointerException to be thrown; or do I do something else? May I 
>> have your
>> continued thoughts on this?
> OK, this is kind of subtle. This is a TCK (conformance) test, so it 
> probably cannot simply be removed; it may need a specification change 
> to clarify this case. I've filed JDK-8167222 to cover these issues. 
> I've made a note in this bug regarding the potential change in 
> DateTimeFormatter.withResolverFields() to use Set.of().
> (There's an additional wrinkle with Set.of() aside from rejecting 
> nulls; it also rejects duplicates by throwing IAE.)
> In any case that code can't be changed to use Set.of() until the 
> test/spec issue is resolved, so for the purposes of this changeset, 
> I'd suggest simply removing the withResolverFields() comment from the 
> webrev. We can revisit this during or after the resolution of 
> JDK-8167222.
> I think this clears all the issues, so you can probably go ahead and 
> work with Patrick to update the webrev. And Patrick, thanks once again 
> for hosting the webrev!
> s'marks

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list