> 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.
Jaikiran Pai has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: no need for {@code} in javadoc ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18674/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18674/files/6e535779..ca265686 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=18674&range=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=18674&range=01-02 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18674.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/18674/head:pull/18674 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18674