Wherever the note is found the javadoc should include

     * <p>This implementation contains a sign-extension bug in the seed
initialization.
     * This manifests if the seed is negative.<p>

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 1:45 AM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 8:17 PM <aherb...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
> >
> > aherbert pushed a commit to branch master
> > in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/commons-codec.git
> >
> >
> > The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
> >      new 1cf4d19  Change AssertionError to IllegalStateException
> > 1cf4d19 is described below
> >
> > commit 1cf4d19069c64d0493f8b92178ffdb728c0c0ac2
> > Author: Alex Herbert <aherb...@apache.org>
> > AuthorDate: Sat Dec 28 01:17:17 2019 +0000
> >
> >     Change AssertionError to IllegalStateException
> > ---
> >  src/main/java/org/apache/commons/codec/digest/MurmurHash3.java | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git
> > a/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/codec/digest/MurmurHash3.java
> > b/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/codec/digest/MurmurHash3.java
> > index d4a95ea..5d9aa9d 100644
> > --- a/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/codec/digest/MurmurHash3.java
> > +++ b/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/codec/digest/MurmurHash3.java
> > @@ -1054,7 +1054,7 @@ public final class MurmurHash3 {
> >                      k = orBytes(unprocessed[0], unprocessed[1],
> > unprocessed[2], data[offset]);
> >                      break;
> >                  default:
> > -                    throw new AssertionError("Unprocessed length should
> > be 1, 2, or 3: " + unprocessedLength);
> > +                    throw new IllegalStateException("Unprocessed length
> > should be 1, 2, or 3: " + unprocessedLength);
> >                  }
> >                  hash = mix32(k, hash);
> >                  // Update the offset and length
> >
>
> That seems clearer, thanks.
>
> This seems like the kind of code we might want fuzz test. It seems
> quite unlikely otherwise we'd hit this case. I also wonder if
>
> Thoughts?
>
> I see in several places:
>
> // Note: This fails to apply masking using 0xffffffffL to the seed.
>
> Shouldn't this be in the Javadoc?
>
> Gary
>


-- 
I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web
<http://like-like.xenei.com>
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren

Reply via email to