Harmony-1170 has been raised to reflect our conclusion. I have attached
a patch for "site/xdocs/subcomponents/classlibrary/compat.xml"
Best regards,
Richard
Richard Liang wrote:
Hello All,
I'd like to update our "Exception-throwing compatibility"[1] to
reflect our discussion in several threa
Richard Liang wrote:
>
>
> Tim Ellison wrote:
>> We don't have such a JIRA category:
>>
>> "If we decide to follow RI, we will raise an "Non-bug differences from
>> Spec" JIRA.
>>
>>
> Yes. Just thinking about whether we need this category :-)
Yes.
geir
--
Tim Ellison wrote:
We don't have such a JIRA category:
"If we decide to follow RI, we will raise an "Non-bug differences from
Spec" JIRA.
Do you think we need this category to record Harmony's complying-with-RI
behavior while breaking the spec? Thanks a lot.
Best regards,
Richard
Do yo
Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
On 8/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2006/8/9, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> If the spec does not specify which exception is thrown, I think RI
*is*
> compliant with the specification. Am I wrong?
I wanted to separate cases when the spec is not
2006/8/9, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 8/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2006/8/9, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > If the spec does not specify which exception is thrown, I think RI *is*
> > compliant with the specification. Am I wrong?
>
> I wanted to separat
On 8/9/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2006/8/9, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> If the spec does not specify which exception is thrown, I think RI *is*
> compliant with the specification. Am I wrong?
I wanted to separate cases when the spec is not clear enough and
RI's behav
2006/8/9, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
If the spec does not specify which exception is thrown, I think RI *is*
compliant with the specification. Am I wrong?
I wanted to separate cases when the spec is not clear enough and
RI's behavior either hard to reproduce or odd.
For example if sqrt
Tim Ellison wrote:
We don't have such a JIRA category:
"If we decide to follow RI, we will raise an "Non-bug differences from
Spec" JIRA.
Yes. Just thinking about whether we need this category :-)
Do you really need the section starting:
"We consider RI is compliant with the Java Speci
Alex Blewitt wrote:
I think that as long as the spec says throws java.x.Y, and we throw a
java.x.Y (or an o.a.h subclass of java.x.Y) then that meets the spec.
Yes. That really complies with the spec. But for Harmony, Complying with
spec is not enough. What we are aiming is that user applicat
Tim Ellison wrote:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
"But there are some cases that RI throws an implementation specific
exception, we shall throw its public superclass. e.g., If RI throws
sun.io.MalformedInputException, we shall throw
java.io.CharConversionException. "
I think it's OK to throw Harmony-
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
2006/8/9, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
> "But there are some cases that RI throws an implementation specific
> exception, we shall throw its public superclass. e.g., If RI throws
> sun.io.MalformedInputException, we shall throw
> java.io.CharConver
2006/8/9, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
> "But there are some cases that RI throws an implementation specific
> exception, we shall throw its public superclass. e.g., If RI throws
> sun.io.MalformedInputException, we shall throw
> java.io.CharConversionException. "
>
> I th
I think that as long as the spec says throws java.x.Y, and we throw a
java.x.Y (or an o.a.h subclass of java.x.Y) then that meets the spec.
I think the wording could be clearer though; for example, the 'public
superclass' is almost certainly meant to be 'an exception in the
standard Java class li
We don't have such a JIRA category:
"If we decide to follow RI, we will raise an "Non-bug differences from
Spec" JIRA.
Do you really need the section starting:
"We consider RI is compliant with the Java Specification, if RI..."
Regards,
Tim
Richard Liang wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I'd like to u
Andrew Zhang wrote:
> "But there are some cases that RI throws an implementation specific
> exception, we shall throw its public superclass. e.g., If RI throws
> sun.io.MalformedInputException, we shall throw
> java.io.CharConversionException. "
>
> I think it's OK to throw Harmony-implement subcl
"But there are some cases that RI throws an implementation specific
exception, we shall throw its public superclass. e.g., If RI throws
sun.io.MalformedInputException, we shall throw
java.io.CharConversionException. "
I think it's OK to throw Harmony-implement subclass of the public superclass
fo
+1.
Hope RI always follows spec or else we need a clear strategy.:)
On 8/9/06, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello All,
I'd like to update our "Exception-throwing compatibility"[1] to reflect
our discussion in several threads recently. I just created a wiki page
here[2], please kin
17 matches
Mail list logo
