harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Varlamov" <alexey.v.varla...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib][luni] update for bootstrapClassPath causes regression on DRL VM
Date Wed, 13 Dec 2006 11:04:32 GMT
2006/12/13, Oliver Deakin <oliver.deakin@googlemail.com>:
> Tim Ellison wrote:
> > Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> >> Do we really have a problem?  Or is it something else?
> >>
> >> Last night, Gregory tested his fix, and I've build snapshots (r486417)
> >> on x86 linux/win and x86_64 linux and spot checked with apps and such,
> >> and things seem to work.
> >>
> >> I'n posting the snapshots now to ~geirm and will send a separate note
> >> for people to evaluate.
> >>
> >
> > Also catching up on mail.  I suggested (on the other thread) that we
> > need to define the return result for undefined properties, answering
> > NULL seemed reasonable, but now I look at the vmiError enum in vmi.h it
> > appears that we have already defined:
> >   "VMI_ERROR_NOT_FOUND -- The requested system property was not found"
> >
> >
>
> This surprises me slightly - I would have imagined we would want to work
> in a similar way
> to the System.getSystem() method and return NULL in the case of a
> non-existent property
> being requested. However, it appears that GetSystemProperty() is
> intended to return
> VMI_ERROR_NOT_FOUND in this case.
>
> I would say that since the function behaviour in this case has not yet
> been clearly spec'ed
> (and we have two VMs that behave differently) we should make a choice
> now about which
> return is correct and fix up the VMs. So, should we just return a NULL
> property value and
> no error code, or return VMI_ERROR_NOT_FOUND?

Is there any reason to distinguish these cases? I suppose no, then
returned NULL is fine.

--
Alexey

>
> Regards,
> Oliver
>
>
> > Regards,
> > Tim
> >
> >
>
> --
> Oliver Deakin
> IBM United Kingdom Limited
>
>

Mime
View raw message