OK, sounds reasonable! On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 6:32 PM Ivan Gerasimov <ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com> wrote:
> Thank you Martin for review! > > On 5/3/19 6:05 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: > > Test should check that Pattern.compile does not return normally, e.g. by > throwing AssertionError. Otherwise LGTM. > > Well. I think, that OOM in this scenario is a limitation of the current > implementation. > If the implementation of Pattern changes, so that it won't need to > allocate that temp array, then it will not have to necessarily throw, as > the pattern is valid. > > With kind regards, > Ivan > > On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 5:54 PM Ivan Gerasimov <ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com> > wrote: > >> Hello! >> >> A private method Pattern. RemoveQEQuoting() contains calculation of an >> array size, which can result in numeric overflow, and cause a confusing >> NegativeArraySizeException. >> >> Would you please help review the fix? >> >> Please note, that expressions `j + 2` and `pLen - i` cannot overflow >> (because j is the index of a substring "\Q", and i is an index < pLen), >> so they are not wrapped with exactXXX() methods. >> >> BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223174 >> WEBREV: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8223174/00/webrev/ >> >> -- >> With kind regards, >> Ivan Gerasimov >> >> > -- > With kind regards, > Ivan Gerasimov > >
