Re: [kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-12-26 Thread Ito Kazumitsu
Hi, > ":" == Mark Wielaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: :> There is only one functional change left between kaffe and classpath in :> computeFields(): :> -fields[DAY_OF_WEEK_IN_MONTH] = (fields[DAY_OF_MONTH] + 12) / 7; :> +fields[DAY_OF_WEEK_IN_MONTH] = (fields[DAY_OF_MONTH] + 6) / 7;

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-12-26 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi, On Sat, 2003-11-29 at 20:15, Dalibor Topic wrote: > after the discussion on the Classpath mailing list, I'd say it looks good ;) > > Mark, can I check it into Classpath's CVS with an updated ChangeLog entry? I'll check this in while I am resyncing with kaffe. There is only one functional cha

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-29 Thread Dalibor Topic
Hi Ito, after the discussion on the Classpath mailing list, I'd say it looks good ;) Mark, can I check it into Classpath's CVS with an updated ChangeLog entry? 2003-11-29 Guilhem Lavaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * java/util/GregorianCalendar.java (computeTime): 12:00 midnight is AM a

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-28 Thread Ito Kazumitsu
Hi, > ":" == Stephen Crawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: :> If Sun's implementation (you don't say which JDK version!) is failing :> a test, then that casts serious doubt on the correctness of the mauve :> testcase itself! I mentioned the JDK version as Sun's java version "1.4.2_02" before s

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-28 Thread Chris Gray
On Friday 28 November 2003 15:43, Dalibor Topic wrote: > In the long run, the JDK is as irrelevant as an industry standard as SCO > Unix is now. Ten years ago, there were many (closed source) > implementations of Unix-ish OSes. GNU/Linux is gradually replacing them. > > I boldly predict that the s

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-28 Thread Dalibor Topic
Hi Stephen, Stephen Crawley wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: A mauve test attached. Since I have got a write access to the mauve CVS registry, I will add it to the registry. The test results shows that Sun's implementation also seems to have something wrong. If Sun's implementation (you don't

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-28 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi, On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 04:39, Stephen Crawley wrote: > Mark Wielaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 02:03, Stephen Crawley wrote: > > > The over-arching principle for Mauve testcases is that the behavior of > > > Sun's Java implementations is the "gold standard" for confor

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-28 Thread Andrew Haley
Stephen Crawley writes: > > I don't understand what you are saying here. We are not building Mauve > tests in order to validate Sun's implementation. Rather, we are > building it to check that other implementations (including Classpath) > conform to the accepted specification for Java. The

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-27 Thread Stephen Crawley
Mark Wielaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 02:03, Stephen Crawley wrote: > > The over-arching principle for Mauve testcases is that the behavior of > > Sun's Java implementations is the "gold standard" for conformance > > testing. > > I don't agree. We should not create Mauv

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-27 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi, On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 02:03, Stephen Crawley wrote: > The over-arching principle for Mauve testcases is that the behavior of > Sun's Java implementations is the "gold standard" for conformance > testing. I don't agree. We should not create Mauve tests to validate some proprietary library impl

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-27 Thread Stephen Crawley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > A mauve test attached. Since I have got a write access to the mauve > CVS registry, I will add it to the registry. The test results shows > that Sun's implementation also seems to have something wrong. If Sun's implementation (you don't say which JDK version!) is fail

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-27 Thread Ito Kazumitsu
Hi, > ":" == Mark Wielaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: :> Looked some more at the code and I see now that the the first change was :> inside a if (time >= gregorianCutover) so it now makes more sense to me. :> And the second change seems correct given the above remark. :> I'll commit it in Cl

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-25 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi, On Mon, 2003-11-24 at 23:57, Ito Kazumitsu wrote: > > 2003-11-25 Ito Kazumitsu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * java/util/GregorianCalendar.java (getLinearTime): Avoid counting > the leap day of the leap year twice. > (computeFields): First week of month is 1 not 0. Thanks

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-24 Thread Ito Kazumitsu
> ":" == Mark Wielaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: :> and to have a ChangeLog entry for this patch (Ito?). How about this? 2003-11-25 Ito Kazumitsu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * java/util/GregorianCalendar.java (getLinearTime): avoid counting the leap day of the leap year twice.

[kaffe] Re: GregorianCalendar fixes

2003-11-24 Thread Andreas Tobler
Mark Wielaard wrote: Hi, Since I am not a GregorianCalendar expert I was hoping that someone could review the following patch which I have in my tree from Ito Kazumitsu. He and I wrote a couple of mauve test cases which are fixed by this and I see no new failures. But people didn't seem to be com