Are you trying to say that the methods in Harmony can use only methods
used in corresponding RI implementations?

2006/9/20, Spark Shen <smallsmallorgan@gmail.com>:
> Spark Shen 写道:
> > Hi :
> > Following is the discussion about JIRA 1492, shall we discuss it here?
> >
> > public class SubMapTest extends TestCase {
> > public void testSubclass() {
> > HashMap map = new HashMap();
> > map.put("a", "a");
> > SubMap map2 = new SubMap(map); // Harmony will throw an unexpected
> > exception here.
> > }
> > }
> >
> > class SubMap<K, V> extends HashMap<K, V> {
> >
> > public V put(K key, V value) {
> > throw new RuntimeException();
> > }
> > }
> >
> >
> > >Nathan Beyer
> > >Harmony's behavior may be different in this case, but I'm not sure I
> > would consider this a valid issue. What's a real use case for this
> > type of sub-classing?
> > [ Show » <http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-1492> ]
> > Nathan Beyer
> > <http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=nbeyer>
> > [18/Sep/06 08:41 PM] Harmony's behavior may be different in this case,
> > but I'm not sure I would consider this a valid issue. What's a real
> > use case for this type of sub-classing?
> >
> > <http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=spark+shen>>Spark
> > Shen
> > >What if change the RuntimeException to UnsupportedOperationException?
> > [ Show » <http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-1492> ]
> > spark shen
> > <http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=spark+shen>
> > [18/Sep/06 08:48 PM] What if change the RuntimeException to
> > UnsupportedOperationException?
> >
> > >Alexey Petrenko
> > >I'm not sure that this is a valid issue to.
> > >As far as I understood the issue is that Harmony calls put method in
> > constructor while RI does not. Right?
> >
> > >If so I do not see any issue here.
> >
> I can not figure out what RI does. And please refer to JIRA 839, it
> reports similar use case.
> My point here is
> 1. we may not be able to predict how users will use our library.
> 2. Users could guess our implementation w/o difficulty, which
> contradicts the encapulation priciple.
> So I prefer to follow RI on this behavior.
>
> When changing to UnsupportedOperationException, the use case is more
> practical, since it is highly like that put operation is not supported.
> But it seems not so practical that this sub-hashMap can not be
> instantiated. May be one more assertion can convince you that this is bug.
>
> public class SubMapTest extends TestCase {
> public void testSubclass() {
> HashMap map = new HashMap();
> map.put("a", "a");
> SubMap map2 = new SubMap(map);
> assertEquals(1, map2.size());
> }
> }
>
> class SubMap<K, V> extends HashMap<K, V> {
> public SubMap(Map<? extends K, ? extends V> m) {
> super(m);
> }
>
> public V put(K key, V value) {
> throw new RuntimeException();
> }
> }
>
> Best regards
>
> --
> Spark Shen
> China Software Development Lab, IBM
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>


-- 
Alexey A. Petrenko
Intel Middleware Products Division