On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 14:10:43 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> So yes, it could be added as a test case, just wouldn't add any more test
> coverage to the existing tests.
Thank you for the explanation, Alan. The current state of the test, in the PR,
looks fine to me then.
-
PR:
On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 12:34:31 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Should we also add a `C:/java` (one with a forward slash) to the new junk
> resource names added in this test, to exercise the path where a forward slash
> is present in a resource name which also has the Windows disallowed `:`
>
On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 11:34:52 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> The ModuleReader implementation for exploded modules maps resource names to
> file paths. A small oversight is that it doesn't handle InvalidPathException
> which is thrown when the resource name maps to something that can't be parsed
>
On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 11:34:52 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> The ModuleReader implementation for exploded modules maps resource names to
> file paths. A small oversight is that it doesn't handle InvalidPathException
> which is thrown when the resource name maps to something that can't be parsed
>
On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 11:34:52 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> The ModuleReader implementation for exploded modules maps resource names to
> file paths. A small oversight is that it doesn't handle InvalidPathException
> which is thrown when the resource name maps to something that can't be parsed
>
The ModuleReader implementation for exploded modules maps resource names to
file paths. A small oversight is that it doesn't handle InvalidPathException
which is thrown when the resource name maps to something that can't be parsed
as a file path. This has a knock on impact to Class/ClassLoader
