On 06/07/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alex Blewitt wrote:
IMNSHO I don't think we should by default copy the toString()
behaviour from the RI, unless mandated by the spec in JavaDoc.
Ok. Good rant, and I agree with it, but I still don't see a reason here
why we shouldn't,
On 06/07/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here here; if only the API was printOn(OutputStream) then we'd all be
happy(er).
I suspect that it's hear, hear, at least there (in Parliament). :-)
Alex.
-
Terms of use :
On 07/07/06, Magnusson, Geir [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If people are relying on one implementation that's undocumented
behaviour, then it's bad code. It may well fail on any other system
(inc. embedded systems, or other OS, or even between different
versions).
No kidding. Welcome to the
IMNSHO I don't think we should by default copy the toString()
behaviour from the RI, unless mandated by the spec in JavaDoc.
Frankly, the toString() has always been undefined, and I'm sick off
Java developers saying Well, yes, but I always expect it to be
[name='value',name='other value'] and
Alex Blewitt wrote:
IMNSHO I don't think we should by default copy the toString()
behaviour from the RI, unless mandated by the spec in JavaDoc.
Frankly, the toString() has always been undefined, and I'm sick off
Java developers saying Well, yes, but I always expect it to be
Alex Blewitt wrote:
IMNSHO I don't think we should by default copy the toString()
behaviour from the RI, unless mandated by the spec in JavaDoc.
Frankly, the toString() has always been undefined, and I'm sick off
Java developers saying Well, yes, but I always expect it to be
Yep. No answer yet. I pinged them for an update, and also asked the
toString() question.
geir
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
IIRC Geir was going to ask Sun if we are allowed to copy their
exception messages
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/7/5, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Richard Liang wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Tim Ellison wrote:
Yep, if the spec tells you what the format of the string should be then
follow it (since apps may be dependent upon it), otherwise I'd be
inclined to invent your own useful string representation.
This
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Richard Liang wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Tim Ellison wrote:
Yep, if the spec tells you what the format of the string should be then
follow it (since apps may be dependent upon it), otherwise I'd be
inclined to invent your own
IIRC Geir was going to ask Sun if we are allowed to copy their
exception messages
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/7/5, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Richard Liang wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Tim Ellison wrote:
Yep, if the spec tells you what the format of the
Andrew Zhang wrote:
On 7/1/06, Alex Blewitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/07/06, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agree. But there are always exceptions. Some toString methods have to
contain some key information as spec required, for example, the size or
index.
Can you give
Hello,
One special case: I'd suggest to test that if you specify some text as
an constructor argument to a subclass of Throwable, then toString()
contains that text.
On 7/3/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
On 7/1/06, Alex Blewitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
Tim Ellison wrote:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
On 7/1/06, Alex Blewitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/07/06, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agree. But there are always exceptions. Some toString methods have to
contain some key information as spec required, for example, the size or
index.
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Tim Ellison wrote:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
On 7/1/06, Alex Blewitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/07/06, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agree. But there are always exceptions. Some toString methods have to
contain some key information as
On 01/07/06, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agree. But there are always exceptions. Some toString methods have to
contain some key information as spec required, for example, the size or
index.
Can you give examples of where the spec specifically mandates the
return values of either
On 7/1/06, Alex Blewitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/07/06, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agree. But there are always exceptions. Some toString methods have to
contain some key information as spec required, for example, the size or
index.
Can you give examples of where the spec
Hi community!
While looking through some of java.beans tests I found many places
where exact output of toString() method is being tested. Moreover, the
test patterns differ from the output generated by RI's toString's.
IMHO there is no much sense in testing of toString() since normally
users do
I'd say that (like hashCode()) there's not a lot of point in testing
the exact output, only behaviour. In other words, if it returns a
String, that should be good enough. There's nothing in the spec to say
what it should be -- all of the toString() methods could return
Harmony is Great! and it'd
18 matches
Mail list logo
