harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [build] status
Date Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:31:45 GMT
Richard Liang wrote:
> Hello Tim,
> 
> I have raised Harmony-910[1] for this issue, patch is also available
> :-)  Would you please have a look at it. Thanks a lot.

I've had a look at it, but you don't appear to fix the problem described
below...

>> Richard Liang wrote:

<snip>

>> The reason is: In en_UK, a FULL style date formatter is the same as a
>> LONG style date formatter. So the return value of format.toPattern()
>> maybe "{0,date,long}", and according to the spec of
>> MessageFormat.toPattern() "...The string is constructed from internal
>> information and therefore *does not necessarily equal* the previously
>> applied pattern." So I think it's a bug of the test case.

So shouldn't you be removing the assertion that they are equal?  It
seems that the suggested patch is relying on a particular implementation
in a given locale, but it still is asserting more than required by the
specification.

Regards,
Tim

-- 

Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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


Mime
View raw message