Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 18579 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2009 08:01:41 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Oct 2009 08:01:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 87492 invoked by uid 500); 16 Oct 2009 08:01:40 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-users-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 87449 invoked by uid 500); 16 Oct 2009 08:01:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@directory.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@directory.apache.org Delivered-To: moderator for users@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 80527 invoked by uid 99); 16 Oct 2009 07:58:01 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) X-SourceIP: 84.74.100.246 Message-ID: <4AD82765.7010700@otego.com> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:57:25 +0200 From: Felix Knecht User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20091010) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: users@directory.apache.org Subject: Re: [Studio] Integer Editor does not accept negative numbers References: <4AD8208F.2070808@apache.org> <4AD8263D.7000906@nextury.com> In-Reply-To: <4AD8263D.7000906@nextury.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 >> Another issue: the RFC says "unlimited magnitude". However the integer >> editor only accepts the Java integer range -2^31...2^31-1. To solve that >> we need to remove the "spinner" widget we use and replace it with an >> normal text field and check the content using a regular expression. >> > Or use a long. It's unlikely that someone will ever inject some value > bigger than |2^63| ... If it's allowed to have bigger values and it needs to be fixed anyway, we shouldn't do any assumptions what the user maybe may do, but fix it according to the RFC ... Just my 2 Cents ... Regards Felix -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkrYJ2UACgkQ2lZVCB08qHGYfwCggfTSDpA3N8aSXQTi3+TkM485 Q3MAn1tSl46124NHkHvIuGLLpw2KDiNE =md0t -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----