harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevin Zhou <zhoukevi...@gmail.com>
Subject Fwd: [jira] Updated: (HARMONY-4392) [classlib][beans]java.beans.Statement/Expression cannot handle overloaded constructor properly
Date Fri, 09 Apr 2010 07:21:28 GMT
Hi,

I made a patch for HARMONY-4392 which was previously raised by Paulex Yang.
For the background information, please refer to [1]. Is there someone who
can help to review this patch and test it?

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-4392

Thank
Kevin Zhou

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kevin Zhou (JIRA) <jira@apache.org>
Date: Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 3:15 PM
Subject: [jira] Updated: (HARMONY-4392)
[classlib][beans]java.beans.Statement/Expression cannot handle overloaded
constructor properly
To: commits@harmony.apache.org



    [
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-4392?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel]

Kevin Zhou updated HARMONY-4392:
--------------------------------

   Attachment: HARMONY-4392.diff

Would you please help to review this?

> [classlib][beans]java.beans.Statement/Expression cannot handle overloaded
constructor properly
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HARMONY-4392
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-4392
>             Project: Harmony
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Non-bug differences from RI
>            Reporter: Paulex Yang
>         Attachments: HARMONY-4392.diff
>
>
> Consider test case below[1], which is extracted from
o.a.h.beans.tests.java.beans.ExpressionTest.  Seems RI 5 and 6 return
different results, further, both results depend on the constructors' order
in MockObject and follow a mysterious rules, while in spec, it is required
to "choose the most specific method using the algorithm specified in the
Java Language Specification".  More interesting stuffs is, if you construct
a Statement, Expression's superclass, in same way, RI 5 has different
result, although in spec, the only difference between the 2 classes are
Expression adds a value property.
> My guess on RI's behavior is it tries to list all constructors via
reflection and then check them one by one whether all parameter is
assignable, at last returns the first matching result, so the result
actually depends on VM's reflection implementation. Current Harmony's beans
actually works in similar way, but unfortunately the different VMs just
return constructors in different ways, including different version of RI.
> So the issue now is if we need to fix it as spec or let it be in "random"
behavior as RI? I prefer to fix Harmony to follow spec.
> [1]
> public ExpressionTest extends TestCase{
>     public void testGetValue_UnboundedOverloadedConstructors() throws
Exception {
>         arguments = new Object[] { "test" };
>         t = new Expression(MockObject.class, "new", arguments);
>         assertTrue(t.getValue() instanceof MockObject);
>          MockObject.assertCalled("new3", arguments);
>         arguments = new Object[] { new Integer(1) };
>         t = new Expression(MockObject.class, "new", arguments);
>         assertTrue(t.getValue() instanceof MockObject);
>         MockObject.assertCalled("new1-2", arguments);
>     }
>     public static class MockObject{
>            public MockObject(String o) {
>             reset();
>             calledMethod = "new3";
>             receivedArguments.add(o);
>         }
>         public MockObject(Object o) {
>             reset();
>             calledMethod = "new2";
>             receivedArguments.add(o);
>         }
>
>         public MockObject(Integer o) {
>             reset();
>             calledMethod = "new1-2";
>             receivedArguments.add(o);
>         }
>         public static void assertCalled(String methodName, Object[]
arguments) {
>             assertEquals(methodName, calledMethod);
>             assertTrue(Arrays.equals(arguments,
receivedArguments.toArray()));
>             reset();
>         }
>         public static void reset() {
>             receivedArguments.clear();
>             calledMethod = null;
>         }
>     }
> }

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.




-- 
Best regards,
Yours, Kevin Zhou

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message