[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2191?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12466044
]
Dyre Tjeldvoll commented on DERBY-2191:
---------------------------------------
Actually I did run derbyall and suites.All with such ASSERTS in my sandbox
yesterday, without seeing any failures. But I removed them before creating the
patch :( But, sure I could put them back. When I think about it, I don't think
should matter what the state of the unused bits is, at least as long as all
other operations respect the lengthAsBits member (I haven't verified that this
is in fact the case, but seems to be the intention), and that grow() does the
proper initialization. But I still think it is good to maintain this as an
invariant because it makes it easier to detect errors.
> Cleanup of FormatableBitSet
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-2191
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2191
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Miscellaneous
> Affects Versions: 10.2.1.6
> Reporter: Dyre Tjeldvoll
> Assigned To: Dyre Tjeldvoll
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 10.3.0.0
>
> Attachments: bitops.v1.diff, bitops.v1.stat, boundarycheck.v1.diff,
> boundarycheck.v1.stat, cleanup2191.diff, cleanup2191.stat, deadcode.v1.diff,
> deadcode.v2.diff, fbstst.v1.diff, fbstst.v1.stat, FormatableBitSetTest.java,
> unusedmethods.v1.diff, unusedmethods.v1.stat, valuenotnull.v1.diff,
> valuenotnull.v1.stat
>
>
> The implementation of FormatableBitSet could be streamlined. Dead code can be
> removed and the implementation of some methods can be simplified.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
