Following up on the as yet unresolved thread initiated here: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-September/035468.html
Thanks, Brian On Sep 29, 2015, at 5:49 PM, Brian Burkhalter <brian.burkhal...@oracle.com> wrote: > I revised floorMod(long x, int y) not to check explicitly check for integer > overflow as it does not look as if this is even possible. I also updated the > appropriate tests for these versions of the three methods at issue. > > In testing I still found discrepancies between the existing implementations > and the ones suggested earlier in this thread. Therefore those > implementations have not been used. If it is desired to move to different > implementations at a later date a separate enhancement issue may be filed. > > The updated webrev is here: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8023217/webrev.01/ > > Thanks, > > Brian > > On Sep 29, 2015, at 8:16 AM, Brian Burkhalter <brian.burkhal...@oracle.com> > wrote: > >> On Sep 29, 2015, at 8:05 AM, Stephen Colebourne <scolebou...@joda.org> wrote: >> >>>> I tested the code which was in the original issue description and found >>>> some >>>> discrepancies. I’ll need to revisit this to see what happened. >>> >>> Yes, the code in the issue for floorDiv() fails when the divisor is >>> negative. The one in my email today works though. >> >> Excellent! I’ll double check it as part of the “fit and finish." >
