On 2016-07-11 18:18, Volker Simonis wrote:
Hi,
here comes a new version of this change. I've tried to address most of
the concerns/suggestions:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8160564.v1/
Looks good. As I'm currently obsessing about startup performance, I did
wish we could rely on (and fix, as a separate issue) the validation
done in build scripts, but there's no real harm in doing proper
validation in runtime as long as we avoid using regex here.
- Finally, I didn't understood the comment about 'List.of might be
preferred over Arrays.asList' so I didn't change that.
Oh, I meant that new List.of(...) can be used as a shorthand for
Arrays.asList(...) in the test. No real difference, just one less
import and a bit cleaner code in my opinion, so please ignore it at
this point.
Thanks!
/Claes
OK to push now (before it gets really over-engineered :)
Thank you and best regards,
Volker
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Volker,
Thanks for adding a new test for it.
Nit: can you wrap the long lines.
As for the bad version, one possible change is to add assert
Runtime.Version.parse(versionNumber) in parseVersionNumbers method and add -esa
in @run tag.
It’d be good to convert this to testng test where the dataprovider can show the
input version and expected returned list.
Mandy
On Jul 7, 2016, at 6:59 AM, Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
can I please have a review for the following change which makes
VersionProps.versionNumbers() testable and the corresponding
regression test:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8160564/
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160564
During the review for "8160457: VersionProps.versionNumbers() is
broken" it was suggested to refactor VersionProps.versionNumbers() in
order to make it testable by a regression test. This change does
exactly that. It extracts the implementation of
VersionProps.versionNumbers() into a new method
parseVersionNumbers(String versionNumber) which can be tested from the
associated regression test.
There are still two points to notice:
- VersionProps.versionNumbers() deliberately doesn't check for badly
formatted version strings because it is assumed it will only get valid
input (see discussion for "JDK-8160000: Runtime.version() cause
startup regressions" at [2]). So we can currently only check that
VersionProps.versionNumbers() accepts all kind of valid version
strings.
- I was a little bit surprised that I could reflectively access and
execute java.lang.VersionProps.parseVersionNumbers() where both the
class and the method are package private. Maybe this is related to
Jigsaw issue #ReflectiveAccessToNonExportedTypes [3]? As I'm not a
Jigsaw expert, I'd be graceful to anybody explaining me why this is
still so easily possible with Jigsaw?
Thank you and best regards,
Volker
[1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-June/042058.html
[2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160000
[3]
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jigsaw/spec/issues/#ReflectiveAccessToNonExportedTypes
