On Wed, 10 Apr 2024 16:17:32 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <j...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> 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 Thank you Naoto and Roger for the inputs and the reviews. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18674#issuecomment-2060988355
