Yes, my intent was "extends AbstractSet<E>" instead of "extends
NewAbstractCollection<E>". I have reflected this in the updated webrev
below. Here's the information:
Webrev URL: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpassani/4802647/2/webrev/
Bug URL: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4802647
1. In MOAT.java, I changed NewAbstractSet to extend AbstractSet<E>.
2. The changes in 1) resulted in finding out that AbstractSet has the
same bug behavior with removeAll(null).
AbstractSet.removeAll(Collection<?> c) was updated accordingly.
3. I filed bug 7123424 to account for the same bug behavior found in
CopyOnWriteArrayList and CopyOnWriteArraySet.
4. It was advised that I skip the failing behavior of
CopyOnWriteArrayList and CopyOnWriteArraySet for
removeAll(null)/retainAll(null) in MOAT.java and provide a comment about
how the skip needs to be removed once bug 7123424 is fixed. This is the
reason for the instanceof checks that were recently added and the added
comments.
Thanks.
On 12/21/2011 7:52 AM, Jason Mehrens wrote:
> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:12:02 +1000
> From: david.hol...@oracle.com
> To: brandon.passan...@oracle.com
> Subject: Re: Code Review Request for Bug #4802647
> CC: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
>
> Brandon,
>
> I don't see the purpose of NewAbstractSet. It is identical to
> NewAbstractCollection.
I would assume the intent was "extends AbstractSet<E>" instead
of "extends NewAbstractCollection<E>".
Jason
--
Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
Brandon Passanisi | Principle Member of Technical Staff
Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to
developing practices and products that help protect the environment
