harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Santiago Gala <sg...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [classlib] matching RI exceptions -- are we required to have this type of compatibility?
Date Mon, 24 Apr 2006 10:45:49 GMT
El lun, 24-04-2006 a las 14:48 +0700, Vladimir Gorr escribió:
> Mikhail,
> 
> I also thought about this scenario. However, if any TCK tests will fail due
> to this reason we cannot certify our product. Nobody will talk about the invalidity of
TCK.
> Most likely we will update our sources.
> 

Not really. The TCK processes have provisions for such "TCK bug
reports". I think the design should not suffer from such a problem, as
the parent says. Only for trivial changes I'd rename an exception. Or
temporarily, while the TCK gets amended.

Regards
Santiago

> Thanks,
> Vladimir.
> 
> On 4/24/06, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There is nothing about TCK here: if the spec requires to throw A
> > and we throw B that extends A then we follow the spec
> >
> > And if there is a TCK test that verifies that we throw A and only A
> > then the test is invalid and we will not have to pass it
> >
> > Sometimes it is an easy fix to throw A rather then B.
> >
> > But there could be two RI methods - one throwing A and another one
> > throwing B
> > such that in our implementation they both refer to some third method.
> >
> > In this case if we throw B in that 3rd method - then we conform the spec,
> > we won't break existing apps and it might cause design weakening
> > if we choose to go coping how RI works.
> >
> > So if the fix is easy then I'd agree to what folks say here, but in
> > general case
> > I'd not set the rule to follow RI this way.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mikhail
> >
> > 2006/4/24, Vladimir Gorr <vvgorr@gmail.com>:
> > > The answer to this question (in my opinion) depends on how TCK processes
> > > similar situations.
> > > If we want to successfully perform this suite on Harmony we should be
> > > compatible with RI.
> > > For certain there are a lot of tests into TCK will fail due to this
> > reason
> > > and we should be ready for this.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Vladimir.
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Look at HARMONY-387.
> > > >
> > > > Example:
> > > > 1) java.io.ByteArrayOutputStream.write(byte[] b , int off, int len):
> > > > Harmony throws ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException when off<0 or/and len
> > > > <0, while RI throws IndexOutOfBoundsException.
> > > > Specification mentions neither ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException nor
> > > > IndexOutOfBoundsException.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Actually ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException is a sub class of
> > > > IndexOutOfBoundsException.
> > > >
> > > > So the statement "both Harmony and RI throw IndexOutOfBoundsException"
> > is
> > > > true.
> > > >
> > > > But do we have to throw exactly those exceptions that are thrown by
> > RI?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Can we throw
> > > > o.a.h.VMRisenNPE that extends NullPointerException?
> > > >
> > > > What if they throw kind of
> > > > sun.internal.SunFavoriteSubClassOfNullPointerException ?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Mikhail
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
-- 
VP and Chair, Apache Portals (http://portals.apache.org)
Apache Software Foundation

Mime
View raw message