> Can I please get a review of this change which proposes to fix the issue
> noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8212895?
>
> As noted in that issue, the `ChronoField.INSTANT_SECONDS` currently is
> initialized to have a minimum and maximum values of `Long.MIN_VALUE` and
> `LONG.MAX_VALUE` respectively. However, `java.time.Instant` only supports
> `-31557014167219200L` and `31556889864403199L` as minimum and maximum values
> for the epoch second.
>
> The commit in this PR updates the `ChronoField.INSTANT_SECONDS`'s value range
> to match the supported min and max values of `Instant` (as suggested by
> Stephen in that JBS issue). This commit also introduces a test to verify this
> change. This new test method as well as existing tests in tier1, tier2 and
> tier3 continue to pass with this change.
Jaikiran Pai has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
no need for {@code} in javadoc
-------------
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18674/files
- new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18674/files/6e535779..ca265686
Webrevs:
- full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=18674&range=02
- incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=18674&range=01-02
Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18674.diff
Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/18674/head:pull/18674
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18674
