Re: RFR: 8256154: Some TestNG tests require default constructors

2020-11-20 Thread Brian Burkhalter
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:50:30 GMT, Conor Cleary wrote: > In TestNG 7, it is a requirement that TestNG is able to create a Test object > using a default constructor. > > This simple fix addresses two such classes so that this requirement is > satisfied by inserting default construtors. Example:

Re: RFR: 8256154: Some TestNG tests require default constructors

2020-11-20 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 09:37:19 GMT, Conor Cleary wrote: >> Ah, missed the final on depth :-) > > Any particular strengths associated with `this(0)` as opposed to the actual > assignment? Aside from the brevity it provides of course. Happy to modify the > PR to include it My personal preference i

Re: RFR: 8256154: Some TestNG tests require default constructors

2020-11-20 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:50:30 GMT, Conor Cleary wrote: > In TestNG 7, it is a requirement that TestNG is able to create a Test object > using a default constructor. > > This simple fix addresses two such classes so that this requirement is > satisfied by inserting default construtors. Example:

Re: RFR: 8256154: Some TestNG tests require default constructors

2020-11-20 Thread Conor Cleary
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:44:52 GMT, Lance Andersen wrote: >> `depth` is `final`, so it needs to be assigned. but this could be replaced >> with `this(0)` > > Ah, missed the final on depth :-) Any particular strengths associated with `this(0)` as opposed to the actual assignment? Aside from the b

Re: RFR: 8256154: Some TestNG tests require default constructors

2020-11-20 Thread Conor Cleary
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:09:30 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > Hi Conor, > > Were you able to verify that the two tests passed properly (and non > trivially) with both the current version of TestNG as well as the new version? > > best regards, > > -- daniel Hi Daniel, Yes, I was able to verify tha

Re: RFR: 8256154: Some TestNG tests require default constructors

2020-11-19 Thread Lance Andersen
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 16:36:02 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> test/jdk/java/lang/StackWalker/Basic.java line 116: >> >>> 114: /** For TestNG */ >>> 115: public Basic() { >>> 116: depth = 0; >> >> Is the assignment really ended here? I only see: >> >> Basic test = new Basic(depth[0]

Re: RFR: 8256154: Some TestNG tests require default constructors

2020-11-19 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:56:59 GMT, Lance Andersen wrote: >> In TestNG 7, it is a requirement that TestNG is able to create a Test object >> using a default constructor. >> >> This simple fix addresses two such classes so that this requirement is >> satisfied by inserting default construtors. E

Re: RFR: 8256154: Some TestNG tests require default constructors

2020-11-19 Thread Lance Andersen
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:50:30 GMT, Conor Cleary wrote: > In TestNG 7, it is a requirement that TestNG is able to create a Test object > using a default constructor. > > This simple fix addresses two such classes so that this requirement is > satisfied by inserting default construtors. Example:

Re: RFR: 8256154: Some TestNG tests require default constructors

2020-11-19 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:50:30 GMT, Conor Cleary wrote: > In TestNG 7, it is a requirement that TestNG is able to create a Test object > using a default constructor. > > This simple fix addresses two such classes so that this requirement is > satisfied by inserting default construtors. Example:

RFR: 8256154: Some TestNG tests require default constructors

2020-11-19 Thread Conor Cleary
In TestNG 7, it is a requirement that TestNG is able to create a Test object using a default constructor. This simple fix addresses two such classes so that this requirement is satisfied by inserting default construtors. Example: `public GetPackages() { ... }` test/jdk/java/lang/Package/GetPa