Re: RFR: JDK-8051563: Convert JAXP function tests in xslt components: : org.apache.qetest.dtm package, org.apache.qetest.trax package to openjdk

Hi Joe/Lance and others. Please review updated version for this one. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/8051563/webrev.01/ Thank you Tristan > On Jan 6, 2015, at 2:27 PM, huizhe wang > wrote: > > > On 1/6/20

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On 7/01/2015 7:45 PM, Remi Forax wrote: A simple Java question, what this code does ? ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); list.add("foo"); list.add("bar"); for(String s: list) { list.remove(s); } :( Rémi tip: the bug lies in ArrayList.Itr.hasNext() (and AbstractList.Itr.has

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8067669: Documentation for methods in Number incomplete regarding too large values.

On 1/7/2015 2:04 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote: On Jan 7, 2015, at 12:08 AM, Andreas Lundblad mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 05:43:26PM -0800, Joseph D. Darcy wrote: Hello, Getting back to this issue in the new year, taking a closer look at the existing cl

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8059175: Zero BigDecimal with negative scale prints leading zeroes in String.format

On 1/7/2015 9:39 AM, Brian Burkhalter wrote: On Jan 7, 2015, at 1:23 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: In java.util.Formatter.BigDecimalLayout.layout() trailing zeroes are erroneously appended when the unscaled value of the BigDecimal is zero and the scale is negative. Some other minor changes are incl

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8067669: Documentation for methods in Number incomplete regarding too large values.

On Jan 7, 2015, at 12:08 AM, Andreas Lundblad wrote: > On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 05:43:26PM -0800, Joseph D. Darcy wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Getting back to this issue in the new year, taking a closer look at >> the existing class-level documentation, I don't really see a >> compelling case for an

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 6481080 : (ann) @Deprecated annotation has no effect on packages

On 1/7/2015 1:44 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: On Jan 7, 2015, at 12:12 AM, joe darcy wrote: Hello, As part of cleaning up the deprecation facility in 9, please review this change to document when a @Deprecated annotation is a no-op: 6481080 : (ann) @Deprecated annotation has no effect on pack

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8059175: Zero BigDecimal with negative scale prints leading zeroes in String.format

On Jan 7, 2015, at 1:23 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: >> In java.util.Formatter.BigDecimalLayout.layout() trailing zeroes are >> erroneously appended when the unscaled value of the BigDecimal is zero and >> the scale is negative. Some other minor changes are included to make the >> logic in the metho

Re: Explicit Serialization API and Security

On 01/07/2015 10:02 AM, Peter Levart wrote: On 01/07/2015 03:54 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote: On 06/01/15 17:49, Peter Levart wrote: On 01/06/2015 06:21 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote: On 6 Jan 2015, at 15:06, Peter Levart wrote: On 01/06/2015 04:03 PM, Peter Levart wrote: private void readObject(Obje

Re: Explicit Serialization API and Security

On 01/07/2015 03:54 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote: On 06/01/15 17:49, Peter Levart wrote: On 01/06/2015 06:21 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote: On 6 Jan 2015, at 15:06, Peter Levart wrote: On 01/06/2015 04:03 PM, Peter Levart wrote: private void readObject(ObjectInputStream in) throws IOException, ClassNo

Re: Explicit Serialization API and Security

On 06/01/15 17:49, Peter Levart wrote: On 01/06/2015 06:21 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote: On 6 Jan 2015, at 15:06, Peter Levart wrote: On 01/06/2015 04:03 PM, Peter Levart wrote: private void readObject(ObjectInputStream in) throws IOException, ClassNotFoundException { ObjectInputStream.Ge

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On 01/07/2015 11:47 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote: On 07/01/15 11:31, Paul Sandoz wrote: On Jan 7, 2015, at 10:45 AM, Remi Forax wrote: A simple Java question, what this code does ? ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); list.add("foo"); list.add("bar"); for(String s: list) { list.remove

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On 07/01/15 11:25, Doug Lea wrote: On 01/07/2015 04:45 AM, Remi Forax wrote: A simple Java question, what this code does ? ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); list.add("foo"); list.add("bar"); for(String s: list) { list.remove(s); } I have a vague recollection that this i

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On 07/01/2015 11:25, Doug Lea wrote: On 01/07/2015 04:45 AM, Remi Forax wrote: A simple Java question, what this code does ? ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); list.add("foo"); list.add("bar"); for(String s: list) { list.remove(s); } I have a vague recollection that this

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On Wednesday 07 January 2015 12:02:42 Chris Hegarty wrote: > > Yes, but that exactly how it works now, that's why second invocation of > > hasNext() returns false and we can see the issue Remi is talking about. If > > hasNext() will be throwing ConcurrentModification than will work as early > > war

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On 07/01/15 11:22, Stanislav Baiduzhyi wrote: On Wednesday 07 January 2015 11:20:57 you wrote: On 07/01/15 10:57, Stanislav Baiduzhyi wrote: On Wednesday 07 January 2015 10:56:01 Chris Hegarty wrote: public boolean hasNext() { -return cursor != size; +retur

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On Wednesday 07 January 2015 12:29:44 Mario Torre wrote: > > Yes, but that exactly how it works now, that's why second invocation of > > hasNext() returns false and we can see the issue Remi is talking about. If > > hasNext() will be throwing ConcurrentModification than will work as early > > warni

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On Jan 7, 2015, at 11:56 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote: > On 07/01/15 10:47, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> On 07/01/15 11:31, Paul Sandoz wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 7, 2015, at 10:45 AM, Remi Forax wrote: >>> A simple Java question, what this code does ? ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); >>>

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

2015-01-07 12:22 GMT+01:00 Stanislav Baiduzhyi : > On Wednesday 07 January 2015 11:20:57 you wrote: >> On 07/01/15 10:57, Stanislav Baiduzhyi wrote: >> > On Wednesday 07 January 2015 10:56:01 Chris Hegarty wrote: >> >>public boolean hasNext() { >> >> >> >> -return cursor !=

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On 01/07/2015 04:45 AM, Remi Forax wrote: A simple Java question, what this code does ? ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); list.add("foo"); list.add("bar"); for(String s: list) { list.remove(s); } I have a vague recollection that this issue has come up before, and that no

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On Wednesday 07 January 2015 11:20:57 you wrote: > On 07/01/15 10:57, Stanislav Baiduzhyi wrote: > > On Wednesday 07 January 2015 10:56:01 Chris Hegarty wrote: > >>public boolean hasNext() { > >> > >> -return cursor != size; > >> +return cursor != itrSize; > >>

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

If I'm not mistaken LinkedList and Vector demonstrate exactly the same buggy behaviour. -Pavel > On 7 Jan 2015, at 11:20, Chris Hegarty wrote: > > On 07/01/15 10:57, Stanislav Baiduzhyi wrote: >> On Wednesday 07 January 2015 10:56:01 Chris Hegarty wrote: >>> public boolean hasNext() {

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On 07/01/15 10:57, Stanislav Baiduzhyi wrote: On Wednesday 07 January 2015 10:56:01 Chris Hegarty wrote: public boolean hasNext() { -return cursor != size; +return cursor != itrSize; } If the user will invoke list.remove(E) to remove current or pre

Re: [9] RFR (M): 8067344: Adjust java/lang/invoke/LFCaching/LFGarbageCollectedTest.java for recent changes in java.lang.invoke

Hi 70 TestMethods testCase = getTestMethod(); 71 if (testCase == TestMethods.EXACT_INVOKER || testCase == TestMethods.INVOKER) { 72 // Invokers aren't collected. 73 return; 74 } Can you just filter those test cases out

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On Wednesday 07 January 2015 10:56:01 Chris Hegarty wrote: > public boolean hasNext() { > -return cursor != size; > +return cursor != itrSize; > } If the user will invoke list.remove(E) to remove current or previous element then iterator will be skippin

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On 07/01/15 10:47, Daniel Fuchs wrote: On 07/01/15 11:31, Paul Sandoz wrote: On Jan 7, 2015, at 10:45 AM, Remi Forax wrote: A simple Java question, what this code does ? ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); list.add("foo"); list.add("bar"); for(String s: list) { list.remove(s);

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On 07/01/15 11:31, Paul Sandoz wrote: On Jan 7, 2015, at 10:45 AM, Remi Forax wrote: A simple Java question, what this code does ? ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); list.add("foo"); list.add("bar"); for(String s: list) { list.remove(s); } :( We could improve the best-effo

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On Jan 7, 2015, at 10:45 AM, Remi Forax wrote: > A simple Java question, what this code does ? > > ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); > list.add("foo"); > list.add("bar"); > for(String s: list) { >list.remove(s); > } > > :( > We could improve the best-effort basis by which Concurre

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

Interesting... I would have expected it to throw java.util.ConcurrentModificationException right away, but it only does so if the list contains exactly 1 or more than 2 elements... best regards, -- daniel On 07/01/15 10:45, Remi Forax wrote: A simple Java question, what this code does ? A

Re: Bug in ArrayList iterator

On Wednesday 07 January 2015 10:45:46 Remi Forax wrote: > A simple Java question, what this code does ? > >ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); >list.add("foo"); >list.add("bar"); >for(String s: list) { > list.remove(s); >} > > :( > > Rémi > tip: the bug lies in ArrayList

Bug in ArrayList iterator

A simple Java question, what this code does ? ArrayList list = new ArrayList<>(); list.add("foo"); list.add("bar"); for(String s: list) { list.remove(s); } :( Rémi tip: the bug lies in ArrayList.Itr.hasNext() (and AbstractList.Itr.hasNext()).

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 6481080 : (ann) @Deprecated annotation has no effect on packages

On Jan 7, 2015, at 12:12 AM, joe darcy wrote: > Hello, > > As part of cleaning up the deprecation facility in 9, please review this > change to document when a @Deprecated annotation is a no-op: > >6481080 : (ann) @Deprecated annotation has no effect on packages >http://cr.openjdk.jav

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8059175: Zero BigDecimal with negative scale prints leading zeroes in String.format

On Dec 24, 2014, at 12:27 AM, Brian Burkhalter wrote: > Please review at your convenience. > > Issue:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059175 > Patch:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8059175/webrev.00/ > > In java.util.Formatter.BigDecimalLayout.layout() trailing zeroes

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 6481080 : (ann) @Deprecated annotation has no effect on packages

On 06/01/2015 23:12, joe darcy wrote: Hello, As part of cleaning up the deprecation facility in 9, please review this change to document when a @Deprecated annotation is a no-op: 6481080 : (ann) @Deprecated annotation has no effect on packages http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/6481080

Re: JDK 9 RFR of 8067669: Documentation for methods in Number incomplete regarding too large values.

On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 05:43:26PM -0800, Joseph D. Darcy wrote: > Hello, > > Getting back to this issue in the new year, taking a closer look at > the existing class-level documentation, I don't really see a > compelling case for an edit this large. > > I for one would be content if the bug were