It looks like this class has been like this since the initial contribution [1].
[1] http://svn.eu.apache.org/viewvc/harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/awt/src/main/java/common/java/awt/GridBagLayout.java?view=log On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm seeing an test error in 'awt'. > > <testcase classname="java.awt.GridBagLayoutRTest" > name="testAddLayoutComponent" time="0.0"> > <error message="AddLayoutComponent: attempt to add null component" > type="java.lang.AssertionError">java.lang.AssertionError: > AddLayoutComponent: attempt to add null component > at java.awt.GridBagLayout.addLayoutComponent(GridBagLayout.java:94) > at > java.awt.GridBagLayoutRTest.testAddLayoutComponent(GridBagLayoutRTest.java:105) > at java.lang.reflect.VMReflection.invokeMethod(VMReflection.java) > > > I'm not exactly sure what the test is supposed to be doing, but I'm > guessing it is testing for some sort of null/illegal parameter. The > interesting thing or actual issue is that the code check the parameter > for null via an assert. > > // awt.7F=AddLayoutComponent: attempt to add null component > assert comp != null : Messages.getString("awt.7F"); //$NON-NLS-1$ > > At some point, this test wouldn't have been failing because asserts > weren't enabled, but now they are and an assertion is being thrown. > I'm going to do some digging to figure out what the correct behavior > should be and maybe see about getting this fix into M8. > > The important thing though is that we need to understand the > appropriate way to use asserts and this isn't one of them. An > assertion SHOULD never fail. If an assertion fails, that should > indicate a programming error within the code; in this case, a Harmony > programming error. Indicating a consumer programming error should be > done via runtime exceptions. > > -Nathan > > > On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> chunrong lai wrote: >>> I am bothly OK with waiting results of the reliability testing or voting >>> with current testing status (to stick to the schedule). >> >> Quality is more important than dates -- so I favor delaying the vote >> until the testing is complete and any issues addressed. >> >> Regards, >> Tim >> >> >>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 10:29 PM, Sian January <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>> >>>> Sorry, that was an assumption on my part because it's quite late by CST. >>>> >>>> Shall we aim for Monday, or are people quite keen to stick to the schedule? >>>> >>>> >>>> 2008/11/7 Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>>> > Sian January wrote: >>>>>> Great - thanks Chunrong. In that case I think we should leave the >>>>>> vote until next week as there is testing still ongoing. >>>>> Why next week? Will it really take that long for the testing to be >>>>> completed Chunrong? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> 2008/11/7 chunrong lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>>>>>> I will upload the snapshot testing result page soon. >>>>>>> The reliability testing has not been finished. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 7:12 PM, Sian January < >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>>>>>>> Are there any objections to starting a vote for M8 later today? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Unless stated otherwise above: >>>>>>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with >>>> number >>>>>>>> 741598. >>>>>>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 >>>> 3AU >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Unless stated otherwise above: >>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number >>>> 741598. >>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU >>>> >>> >> >
