Hi Roger,
Thank you for your comment. I added a brief comment in the issue on how
the implementation behaves in the problem case.
Naoto
On 8/18/20 8:19 AM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Hi Naoto,
I think the issue would benefit from a comment describing the solution.
Its not clear how the code addresses the issue.
Thanks, Roger
On 8/17/20 7:42 PM, naoto.s...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Joe,
It turned out that the previous fix did not address plural format
cases. That means that just making the divisor negative to indicate
non-placeholder cannot distinguish multiple plural cases with the same
divisor. Instead, I created a list of placeholders (minimum digits)
for each index and count. Here is the updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~naoto/8251499/webrev.01/
I added a new test case (COMPACT_PATTERN14), which actually is
extracted from CLDR 38 Somali locale that demonstrates the issue. I'd
appreciate your further review.
Naoto
On 8/14/20 6:21 PM, Joe Wang wrote:
Hi Naoto,
Looks good to me.
While a negative divisor representing no zeros is newly introduced,
the "divisor > 0" checks seem to have always been beneficial. I had
to count the number of ""s in COMPACT_PATTERN13 :-)
Have a great weekend!
Joe
On 8/14/2020 3:20 PM, naoto.s...@oracle.com wrote:
Hello,
Please review the fix for the following issue:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8251499
The proposed changeset is located at:
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~naoto/8251499/webrev.00/
The current implementation of CompactNumberFormat assumes that there
is always the number placeholder part in compact patterns. This is
not always true. In fact, upcoming CLDR 38 resurrects such patterns,
so this fix is a precursor to support CLDR 38.
Naoto
