On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 09:52:39 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <j...@openjdk.org> wrote:

> Can I please get a review of this change which proposes to fix the issue 
> noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8212895?
> 
> As noted in that issue, the `ChronoField.INSTANT_SECONDS` currently is 
> initialized to have a minimum and maximum values of `Long.MIN_VALUE` and 
> `LONG.MAX_VALUE` respectively. However, `java.time.Instant` only supports 
> `-31557014167219200L` and `31556889864403199L` as minimum and maximum values 
> for the epoch second.
> 
> The commit in this PR updates the `ChronoField.INSTANT_SECONDS`'s value range 
> to match the supported min and max values of `Instant` (as suggested by 
> Stephen in that JBS issue). This commit also introduces a test to verify this 
> change. This new test method as well as existing tests in tier1, tier2 and 
> tier3 continue to pass with this change.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 89129e3f
Author:    Jaikiran Pai <j...@openjdk.org>
URL:       
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/89129e3f672d8af9613ad2a72e64322661836c96
Stats:     17 lines in 2 files changed: 14 ins; 0 del; 3 mod

8212895: ChronoField.INSTANT_SECONDS's range doesn't match the range of Instant

Reviewed-by: rriggs, naoto

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18674

Reply via email to