Tim, that is excellent! Thank you.
I have couple of minor questions:
Am I right with interpretation that the primary source is the spec
rather than RI behavior? If the spec is consistent and logical, but
contradicts to the RI behavior we are basing on spec? I'm asking just
because that caused
On Monday 24 April 2006 23:34, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
1) Could we simply have a classloader that can be put in a special mode
so it doesn't that unit tests for bootclasspath-resident packages are
not on the boot classpath?
If you mean that the custom classloader would try to load classes
Jimmy, Jing Lv wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Vladimir Gorr wrote:
Mikhail,
I also thought about this scenario. However, if any TCK tests will
fail due
to this reason
we cannot certify our product. Nobody will talk about the invalidity
of TCK.
Most likely we will update our sources.
Anton Avtamonov wrote:
Tim, that is excellent! Thank you.
I have couple of minor questions:
Am I right with interpretation that the primary source is the spec
rather than RI behavior? If the spec is consistent and logical, but
contradicts to the RI behavior we are basing on spec? I'm
.ser is commonly used for Java serialized form
http://filext.com/detaillist.php?extdetail=SER
Regards,
Tim
Stepan Mishura wrote:
Hi,
Can we at least agree on extension for serialization resource files?
Defining common extension can be a first step in merging serialization
frameworks.
On 4/25/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anton Avtamonov wrote:
Tim, that is excellent! Thank you.
I have couple of minor questions:
Am I right with interpretation that the primary source is the spec
rather than RI behavior? If the spec is consistent and logical, but
On 4/25/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jimmy, Jing Lv wrote:
I agree.
But there are at least two exceptional situation:
1) several exceptions throws from one method, which extend one parent
class, e.g. ConnectionException and UnknownHostException, javadoc writes
throws
Nathan Beyer wrote:
I'll add my vote to using the [topic] markers. This works well for other
Apache projects like Jakarta Commons. I think they've split of some separate
mailing lists, but this was based on the sheer volume for certain projects.
+1. We could also give some common-used topic
Tim Ellison wrote:
.ser is commonly used for Java serialized form
http://filext.com/detaillist.php?extdetail=SER
So we will rename the 296 files? wow ;-)
Regards,
Tim
Stepan Mishura wrote:
Hi,
Can we at least agree on extension for serialization resource files?
Defining common
On 25 April 2006 at 7:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: mloenko
Date: Tue Apr 25 00:34:21 2006
New Revision: 396803
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=396803view=rev
Log:
applied changes for the tests from HARMONY-319:
BigDecimal and Biginteger test failures should be fixed
On 4/25/06, Dmitry M. Kononov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/25/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jimmy, Jing Lv wrote:
I agree.
But there are at least two exceptional situation:
1) several exceptions throws from one method, which extend one parent
class, e.g.
On 4/25/06, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Ellison wrote:
.ser is commonly used for Java serialized form
http://filext.com/detaillist.php?extdetail=SER
So we will rename the 296 files? wow ;-)
If we will be affraid to beautify different contributions to be in the
single
On 25 April 2006 at 9:22, Paulex Yang (JIRA) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-162?page=all ]
Paulex Yang updated HARMONY-162:
Attachment: Harmony162.zip
Please try this patch, thanks
Paulex,
In the
Anton Avtamonov wrote:
On 4/25/06, Dmitry M. Kononov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/25/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jimmy, Jing Lv wrote:
I agree.
But there are at least two exceptional situation:
1) several exceptions throws from one method, which extend one parent
class, e.g.
Stepan
These patches have lots of clashes now. I have new versions if you'd
like me to upload them - or I can upload a new combined patch?
-Mark.
On 25 April 2006 at 9:56, Stepan Mishura (JIRA) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-353?page=all ]
It would be nice to have a new combined patch.
Thanks,
Stepan.
On 4/25/06, Mark Hindess wrote:
Stepan
These patches have lots of clashes now. I have new versions if you'd
like me to upload them - or I can upload a new combined patch?
-Mark.
On 25 April 2006 at 9:56, Stepan Mishura
On Tuesday 25 April 2006 11:23, Anton Avtamonov wrote:
If we will be affraid to beautify different contributions to be in the
single style we will have something very ugly and consisting of
different patches rather than a product.
A patchy implementation of J2SE? That would never do. (8-)
Mark,
Good point. I preferred zip because it is much smaller than separated
files. In most cases, comparing with the total size of all separated
files, the zip's size is about 1/7, so that it is also easier to
download(someone still need to download the bytes even browsing in
browser). And
On 4/25/06, Jimmy, Jing Lv [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SNIP
For the example 1) I mean the spec usually merge several exceptions into
one parent exception. In this situation, commonly RI throws child
exception itself, although it is hard to tell what RI exactly throw in
some special situation.
We did. I'll fix it.
Would you volunteer providing a patch that replaces assertTrue with assertEquals
in the remaining test methods?
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/4/25, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 25 April 2006 at 7:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: mloenko
Date: Tue Apr 25 00:34:21
On 25 April 2006 at 18:25, Paulex Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark,
Good point. I preferred zip because it is much smaller than separated
files. In most cases, comparing with the total size of all separated
files, the zip's size is about 1/7, so that it is also easier to
Jimmy, Jing Lv wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Vladimir Gorr wrote:
Mikhail,
I also thought about this scenario. However, if any TCK tests will
fail due
to this reason
we cannot certify our product. Nobody will talk about the invalidity
of TCK.
Most likely we will update our
psst... hey, Mikhail... how about a [classlib] on this subject line? :)
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
Vladimir,
Method available() is still used to determine endOfInput parameter.
According to specification the
method should be overridden by subclasses.
'should' does not mean 'must' , moreover
I'm convinced, and have practiced in your way, see Harmony-346:)
Mark Hindess wrote:
On 25 April 2006 at 18:25, Paulex Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark,
Good point. I preferred zip because it is much smaller than separated
files. In most cases, comparing with the total size of all
Yes, that would be another great project, but will there be enough of a
coding element?
I was reading through the SOC docs, and while it's not beaten over the
readers head, there does appear to be a strong requirement of developing
new code. As an example, working on an OSS project doing
Tim Ellison wrote:
Anton Avtamonov wrote:
Tim, that is excellent! Thank you.
I have couple of minor questions:
Am I right with interpretation that the primary source is the spec
rather than RI behavior? If the spec is consistent and logical, but
contradicts to the RI behavior we are basing
Anton Avtamonov wrote:
On 4/25/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anton Avtamonov wrote:
Tim, that is excellent! Thank you.
I have couple of minor questions:
Am I right with interpretation that the primary source is the spec
rather than RI behavior? If the spec is consistent and
Chris Gray wrote:
On Monday 24 April 2006 23:34, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
1) Could we simply have a classloader that can be put in a special mode
so it doesn't that unit tests for bootclasspath-resident packages are
not on the boot classpath?
If you mean that the custom classloader would
+1
Mark Hindess wrote:
On 25 April 2006 at 9:22, Paulex Yang (JIRA) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-162?page=all ]
Paulex Yang updated HARMONY-162:
Attachment: Harmony162.zip
Please try this patch, thanks
Mark Hindess wrote:
On 25 April 2006 at 18:25, Paulex Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark,
Good point. I preferred zip because it is much smaller than separated
files. In most cases, comparing with the total size of all separated
files, the zip's size is about 1/7, so that it is also
On 4/25/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anton Avtamonov wrote:
On 4/25/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anton Avtamonov wrote:
Tim, that is excellent! Thank you.
I have couple of minor questions:
Am I right with interpretation that the primary source is the
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Chris Gray wrote:
On Monday 24 April 2006 23:34, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
1) Could we simply have a classloader that can be put in a special mode
so it doesn't that unit tests for bootclasspath-resident packages are
not on the boot classpath?
If you mean that the
Anton,
look at Do we want to be bug compatible? thread
everybody agreed to the scheme:
1. we should comply with spec
2. if RI is contradict with spec, and RI is not logical(sometimes it is
very obvious, you know what I mean), we comply with spec; else, we
discuss it case by case.
3. if spec is
Tim Ellison wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Chris Gray wrote:
On Monday 24 April 2006 23:34, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
1) Could we simply have a classloader that can be put in a special mode
so it doesn't that unit tests for bootclasspath-resident packages are
not on the boot classpath?
If
Hi Alexander,
Let me question the following requirement from your list:
o System should have a possibility to vary test behavior and
stress conditions using arguments
Actually I'm thinking here about a test suite built from a simple
blocks
like small and fast unit tests, or functional tests
Can one of the list admins for the -commits list check to see why the
new build (and test) status messages are not getting through to the
list? The From address will be:
Apache Harmony Build [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and the subjects will be one of:
Subject: [continuum] BUILD FAILURE:
On 4/25/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anton,
look at Do we want to be bug compatible? thread
everybody agreed to the scheme:
1. we should comply with spec
2. if RI is contradict with spec, and RI is not logical(sometimes it is
very obvious, you know what I mean), we comply
Mikhail,
OK, I'll prepare new patch. I've found other 2 issues that can affect
InputStreamReader and I'll submit it soon.
Thanks.
Vladimir.
On 4/25/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vladimir,
Method available() is still used to determine endOfInput parameter.
According to
I got
[continuum] BUILD ERROR: Classlib/win.ia32 Build/Test
about 38 mins ago w/ Message-ID :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark Hindess wrote:
Can one of the list admins for the -commits list check to see why the
new build (and test) status messages are not getting through to the
list? The From
Seems that SVN was unreachable from here for a while.
I see it is building now so fingers-crossed for a BUILD SUCCESSFUL
message any time soon.
Regards,
Tim
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
I got
[continuum] BUILD ERROR: Classlib/win.ia32 Build/Test
about 38 mins ago w/ Message-ID :
[EMAIL
From my nag system messages, there was a problem in infra, but things
look like they are back together.
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr
SSG/MPD
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1 203 665 6437
-Original Message-
From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 11:09 AM
To:
So note that there may be delay in recovery - gettting the mail that
queued up back out...
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr
SSG/MPD
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1 203 665 6437
-Original Message-
From: Magnusson, Geir [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 11:13 AM
To:
Hello
I'd like to bring this thread back.
Number of tests is growing and it is time to put them in order.
So far we may have:
1) implementation-specific tests that designed to be run from bootclasspath
2) implementation-specific tests that might be run from classpath
3) implementation-specific
Geir agreed to 1-5 guidline in Do we want to be bug compatible? thread.
Probably doc does not exactly match them. Let's ask Geir
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/4/25, Anton Avtamonov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 4/25/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anton,
look at Do we want to be bug
44 matches
Mail list logo
