Nice work. A couple of small points: A qualified class name is one that has a package prefix. So it is surprising that verifyUnqualifiedClassName allows a package prefix. Maybe it needs a different name.
The testing looks adequate, but you might consider using a little combinatorial code to generate bad and good class names. Such code could be shared between the unit tests that test x.y names and Lx/y; names. Something like: char goodsep = '.' or '/'; ArrayList<String> badnames, goodnames; … goodnames.addAll(goodunqnames); badnames.addAll(badunqnames); for (int i = 0; i < 2; i++) { for (String pkg : badpkgnames) { …prepend pkg+goodsep to each badnames and goodnames and add to badnames... } for (char sep : "./;[".toCharArray()) { for (String pkg : goodpkgnames) { if (sep == goodsep) …prepend pkg+sep to each goodnames and add to goodnames… else …prepend pkg+sep to each goodnames and add to badnames… } …prepend sep to each goodnames and add to badnames… …appendpend sep to each goodnames and add to badnames… } return List.of(badnames, goodnames); // return for use in unit test > On Jan 7, 2019, at 10:17 AM, Vicente Romero <vicente.rom...@oracle.com> wrote: > > I have updated the webrev after additional feedback from the TCK tester > please check last version at [1] > > Thanks, > Vicente > > [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/8215510/webrev.01 > > > On 1/3/19 12:21 PM, Vicente Romero wrote: >> Please review the fix for bug [1] at [2]. Basically the constants API >> introduced as part of JEP-334 [3] were accepting descriptors and class names >> not allowed by the spec. This implementation fixes several issues found by >> TCK tests on JEP-334, >> >> Thanks, >> Vicente >> >> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8215510 >> [2] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/8215510/webrev.00/ >> [3] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8203252 >