Hi Ulf,
Comment inlined.
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Ulf Zibis <ulf.zi...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Sean,
>
> Am 23.03.2012 07:45, schrieb Sean Chou:
>
>> Hi Ulf,
>>
>> I'm sorry I didn't quite get your testcase.
>>
> This is not a testcase, just a draft of an additionally more flexible test
> object to replace TConcurrentHashMap/2.
>
>
> Will you please provide a jtreg style testcase with main method ?
>>
> Well, as I'm missing your agreement, that David's test implementation
> doesn't guarantee to test the right toArray method of AbstractCollection as
> I explained before, I'm afraid that additional effort would be for garbage.
>
Every testcase or fix goes this way, like the first testcase I provided. If
your suggestion is valuable, I don't think it will be wasted.
>
> Aside, as the instantiation of (several) ConcurrentHashMap subclassed test
> objects seems more expensive, I believe, my simple TestCollection would
> increase the performance of the testcases.
What's the exact problem you want to fix in this case?
>
>
> I was thinking you were worried by the comment "// inherits from
>> AbstractCollection.toArray()" and "map2", if that was the case, I would
>> like to modify.
>>
> This is additionally true, but not my main issue, as later to me it turned
> out, that "// inherits from AbstractCollection.toArray()" is not enough to
> guarantee that the right toArray method is actually tested, aside to look
> not obvious IMO.
>
If you really have this concern, you should provide your testcase !
>
> -Ulf
>
> P.S.: better rename to:
> void setPseudoConcurrentSizeCourse(**int... sizes) {...}
>
>
>
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:57 AM, Ulf Zibis <ulf.zi...@gmx.de <mailto:
>> ulf.zi...@gmx.de>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sean,
>>
>> bad news ;-) ...
>>
>> Am 22.03.2012 08:28, schrieb Sean Chou:
>>
>> Hi Ulf,
>>
>> I'm glad you agreed my suggestion.
>>
>> To all:
>> Can this patch be committed as it has been reviewed by David
>> Holmes and Mike Duigou,
>> and Ulf also says agreed ?
>>
>>
>> I agree with your implementation of AbstractCollection, but NOT with
>> the test.
>> For correct testing I suggest to use:
>>
>> /**
>> *
>> * @author Ulf Zibis
>> */
>> public class TestCollection<E> extends AbstractCollection<E> {
>>
>> private E[] elements;
>> private int[] sizes;
>> private int nextSize;
>>
>> public TestCollection(E[] elements) {
>> this.elements = elements;
>> setConcurrentSizeCourse(null);
>> }
>>
>> void setConcurrentSizeCourse(int... sizes) {
>> this.sizes = sizes == null ? new int[]{elements.length} : sizes;
>> nextSize = 0;
>> }
>>
>> @Override
>> public int size() {
>> return sizes[nextSize == sizes.length-1 ? nextSize :
>> nextSize++];
>> }
>>
>> @Override
>> public Iterator<E> iterator() {
>> return new Iterator<>() {
>>
>> int pos = 0;
>>
>> public boolean hasNext() {
>> return pos < sizes[nextSize];
>> }
>>
>> public E next() {
>> return elements[pos++];
>> }
>>
>> public void remove() {
>> throw new UnsupportedOperationException(**"Not
>> supported yet.");
>> }
>> };
>> }
>> }
>>
>> -Ulf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Sean Chou
>>
>>
--
Best Regards,
Sean Chou
