Hello Anton,
Thanks a lot. Yes, we can use test to investigate the behavior of RI. :-)
Richard Liang
China Software Development Lab, IBM
Anton Avtamonov wrote:
On 2/16/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hmm, they look to me like they could be impl methods that were
inadvertently exposed. They don't seem to fit in to the BreakIterator bag.
If I were you I'd implement them to throw a NotYetImplementedException.
Regards,
Tim
I agree that those methods are a bit strange... Does the proposed
exception well fit to the compatibility strategy? As I know once the
method was exposed it will never be removed from spec and therefore
everyone can use it...
I did 5 min research and found that their implementation should be
very simple (sorry I provide the test not in JUnit format):
Method getInt = BreakIterator.class.getDeclaredMethod("getInt", new
Class[] {new byte[0].getClass(), Integer.TYPE});
getInt.setAccessible(true);
Object result = getInt.invoke(null, new Object[] {new byte[] {0, 0, 0,
1, 1, 0}, new Integer(0)});
System.err.println("expected 1 = " + (new Integer(1).equals(result)));
result = getInt.invoke(null, new Object[] {new byte[] {0, 0, 0, 1, 1,
0}, new Integer(1)});
System.err.println("expected 257 = " + (new Integer(257).equals(result)));
result = getInt.invoke(null, new Object[] {new byte[] {0, 0, 0, 1, 10,
0}, new Integer(1)});
System.err.println("expected 266 = " + (new Integer(266).equals(result)));
IMHO, it is not very difficult to implement.
--
Anton Avtamonov,
Intel Middleware Products Division
