Hi Mandy,
Given you can't actually test ArrayList I would drop it altogether and
move the test to java/util/vector/TestEnsureCapacity
David
Mandy Chung said the following on 10/19/10 14:07:
On 10/18/10 4:54 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Mandy,
The functional changes seem ok. However the ArrayList test is not
right because it checks the size not the capacity. The same with the
Vector test, though at least with Vector you can check capacity().
I missed the Vector.capacity() method. Thanks. I updated the test.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/6992121/webrev.01/
I find it odd that ArrayList has a very well defined notion of
capacity yet no method to query that capacity.
True. I don't have the history but wonder if this is intentional.
Mandy
David
Mandy Chung said the following on 10/19/10 08:41:
Please review the fix for:
6992121: StringBuilder.ensureCapacity(int minCap) throws
OutOfMemoryError with minCap=Integer.MIN_VALUE
Webrev at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/6992121/webrev.00/
This is a regression caused by the changes for 6933217 (Huge arrays
handled poorly in core libraries). The ensureCapacity() method in
the StringBuffer, StringBuilder, ArrayList, and Vector classes are a
public API that accepts negative numbers. The following
overflow-conscious code:
if (minimumCapacity - value.length> 0)
considers negative minimumCapacity as overflow case where
OutOfMemoryError will be thrown. So the implementation of the public
ensureCapacity() methods need to check if the input argument is
positive before doing the above overflow-conscious check.
Thanks
Mandy
