Hello Sandipan, Finally got this off the back burner …
This review request follows this thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-June/027086.html in which you provided a patch (thank you!) for: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043740 I’ve created an updated webrev here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8043740/webrev.00/ Aside from minor reformatting there is no update to the proposed FloatingDecimal change. I have not however included the test class Bug8043740 from the contributed patch opting instead to update the existing ParseDouble test by adding a few more strings to the goodStrings array. The changes to FloatingDecimal appear reasonable to me. I am wondering however if lines 2001-2002 should not be changed to include !expOverflow in the conditional: 2001 if (!expOverflow && expSign == 1 && decExp < 0 2002 && (expVal + decExp) < expLimit) { 2003 // Cannot overflow: adding a positive and negative number. 2004 decExp += expVal; I don’t think that it’s possible for both expOverflow and the conditionals at lines 2001-2002 of the webrev to all be true, but the additional test would guarantee branching to the correct block. Thanks, Brian On Jun 2, 2014, at 6:08 AM, Sandipan Razzaque <m...@sandipan.net> wrote: > I've made a quick revision to that last patch. Please find inline the > latest link + patch. > > http://www.sandipan.net/public/webrevs/8043740/webrev.01/
