harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Petrenko" <alexey.a.petre...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib][luni] Arrays.sort() incompatibility with RI
Date Wed, 16 May 2007 18:23:35 GMT
Eclipse people has already committed a patch.
Eugene, could you please check that it works as expected.

Thanks in advance.

SY, Alexey

2007/5/16, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com>:
> Agreed, I've filed a new bug agains Eclipse [1].
>
> SY, Alexey
>
> [1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=187223
>
> 2007/5/16, Oliver Deakin <oliver.deakin@googlemail.com>:
> > Agreed. Should sort() be expected to behave like the RI for invalid
> > comparators? IMHO the answer is no. I think in this case a bug should be
> > raised with Eclipse to get the test fixed.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Oliver
> >
> > Aleksey Ignatenko wrote:
> > > The only fix for all related issues is to have the same implementation of
> > > such functionality as RI, as you understand it is unreachable goal unless
> > > you use RI classlib. So therefore I would say the right solution is to
> > > fix
> > > tests.
> > >
> > > Aleksey.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 5/16/07, Sergey Kuksenko <sergey.kuksenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> As we discussed the source of the errror is incorrect comparator.
> > >> However, I can suggest a patch to Arrays which makes Arrays.sort()
> > >> slightly
> > >> close to RI.
> > >> With the patch sorting algorithm is not changed, but
> > >> ArraysSortTest.javais
> > >> passed as on RI.
> > >> The patch is attached to the issue.
> > >>
> > >> On 5/16/07, Aleksey Ignatenko <aleksey.ignatenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > From H-3339 comment:
> > >> >
> > >> > As the bug is in the tests then it is to be filed on Eclipse and this
> > >> JIRA
> > >> > closed with comment about Eclipse bug.
> > >> > Please, see https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=176157 as
> > >> > example
> > >> > of Harmony related bug.
> > >> >
> > >> > BR,
> > >> > Aleksey Ignatenko.
> > >> >
> > >> > On 5/15/07, Sergey Kuksenko <sergey.kuksenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Hi All,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > As you wrote in the JIRA the reason of failure is incorrect
> > >> Comparator
> > >> > > which
> > >> > > is used in the test.
> > >> > > The Comparator violates the follwing rule from specification:
> > >> > > "The implementor must ensure that sgn(compare(x, y)) ==
> > >> > > -sgn(compare(y, x))for all
> > >> > > x and y."
> > >> > > So I thing that It would be more correct to fix a comparator
from
> > >> test.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Some words about bug2bug compatibility. The fact that RI has
> > >> different
> > >> > > result on this comparator means nothing, because in case of
> > >> different
> > >> > > incorect comparator RI may give a different unpredictable
> > >> results. So
> > >> > > should
> > >> > > we check *all possible set of incorrect comparators* and move
> > >> exactly
> > >> in
> > >> > > same results as done by RI?
> > >> > > I think that it will mean that we should have completely the
same
> > >> > > implementation of sorting.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On 5/15/07, Eugene Ostrovsky <eugene.s.ostrovsky@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Hi all.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Some of eclipse tests pass on RI but fail on harmony. See
> > >> > > > *HARMONY-3339<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3339>
> > >> > > > * .
> > >> > > > The tests are incorrect. They pass on RI due to difference
in
> > >> > > > implementation
> > >> > > > of Arrays.sort() method.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Shall we alter our Array.sort() implementation to be consistent
> > >> with
> > >> > RI
> > >> > > > ant
> > >> > > > to make these buggy tests pass?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Thanks,
> > >> > > > Eugene.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > Best regards,
> > >> > > ---
> > >> > > Sergey Kuksenko.
> > >> > > Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division.
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Best regards,
> > >> ---
> > >> Sergey Kuksenko.
> > >> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division.
> > >>
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Oliver Deakin
> > Unless stated otherwise above:
> > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
> > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
> >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message