I'm seeing an test error in 'awt'.
<testcase classname="java.awt.GridBagLayoutRTest"
name="testAddLayoutComponent" time="0.0">
<error message="AddLayoutComponent: attempt to add null component"
type="java.lang.AssertionError">java.lang.AssertionError:
AddLayoutComponent: attempt to add null component
at java.awt.GridBagLayout.addLayoutComponent(GridBagLayout.java:94)
at
java.awt.GridBagLayoutRTest.testAddLayoutComponent(GridBagLayoutRTest.java:105)
at java.lang.reflect.VMReflection.invokeMethod(VMReflection.java)
I'm not exactly sure what the test is supposed to be doing, but I'm
guessing it is testing for some sort of null/illegal parameter. The
interesting thing or actual issue is that the code check the parameter
for null via an assert.
// awt.7F=AddLayoutComponent: attempt to add null component
assert comp != null : Messages.getString("awt.7F"); //$NON-NLS-1$
At some point, this test wouldn't have been failing because asserts
weren't enabled, but now they are and an assertion is being thrown.
I'm going to do some digging to figure out what the correct behavior
should be and maybe see about getting this fix into M8.
The important thing though is that we need to understand the
appropriate way to use asserts and this isn't one of them. An
assertion SHOULD never fail. If an assertion fails, that should
indicate a programming error within the code; in this case, a Harmony
programming error. Indicating a consumer programming error should be
done via runtime exceptions.
-Nathan
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> chunrong lai wrote:
>> I am bothly OK with waiting results of the reliability testing or voting
>> with current testing status (to stick to the schedule).
>
> Quality is more important than dates -- so I favor delaying the vote
> until the testing is complete and any issues addressed.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>
>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 10:29 PM, Sian January <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry, that was an assumption on my part because it's quite late by CST.
>>>
>>> Shall we aim for Monday, or are people quite keen to stick to the schedule?
>>>
>>>
>>> 2008/11/7 Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> > Sian January wrote:
>>>>> Great - thanks Chunrong. In that case I think we should leave the
>>>>> vote until next week as there is testing still ongoing.
>>>> Why next week? Will it really take that long for the testing to be
>>>> completed Chunrong?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 2008/11/7 chunrong lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>>>> I will upload the snapshot testing result page soon.
>>>>>> The reliability testing has not been finished.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 7:12 PM, Sian January <
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>>>>>> Are there any objections to starting a vote for M8 later today?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>>>>>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
>>> number
>>>>>>> 741598.
>>>>>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
>>> 3AU
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
>>> 741598.
>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
>>>
>>
>
