On 05/10/18 10:42, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 11:40 AM Mark Thomas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 04/10/18 22:07, [email protected] wrote:
>>> Author: isapir
>>> Date: Thu Oct 4 21:07:54 2018
>>> New Revision: 1842849
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1842849&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> System.load() expects absolute path.
>>
>> Remember to consider whether or not any changes you make to trunk should
>> be back-ported to 8.5.x and 7.0.x. Generally, changes are back-ported
>> unless they require changing a public API (as defined in RELEASE-NOTES)
>> or are considering likely to cause a regression.
>>
>> <snip/>
>>
>>> Modified:
>> tomcat/trunk/test/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/openssl/TestOpenSSLConf.java
>>> URL:
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomcat/trunk/test/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/openssl/TestOpenSSLConf.java?rev=1842849&r1=1842848&r2=1842849&view=diff
>>>
>> ==============================================================================
>>> ---
>> tomcat/trunk/test/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/openssl/TestOpenSSLConf.java
>> (original)
>>> +++
>> tomcat/trunk/test/org/apache/tomcat/util/net/openssl/TestOpenSSLConf.java
>> Thu Oct 4 21:07:54 2018
>>> @@ -87,7 +87,11 @@ public class TestOpenSSLConf extends Tom
>>>
>>> @Test
>>> public void testOpenSSLConfCmdCipher() throws Exception {
>>> - log.info("Found OpenSSL version 0x" +
>> Integer.toHexString(OPENSSL_VERSION));
>>> + if (TesterSupport.isOpensslAvailable())
>>> + log.info("Found OpenSSL version 0x" +
>> Integer.toHexString(OPENSSL_VERSION));
>>> + else
>>> + log.warn("OpenSSL not found: " +
>> TesterSupport.OPENSSL_ERROR);
>>> +
>>
>> The Tomcat style is to always use { and } even for one line for clarity.
>>
>> Due to the age of the code base, there are a mix of styles. Generally,
>> we try and move code towards the currently accepted style as we change it.
>>
>
> +1 a lack of { } is too big a possible bug source to ignore.
I just tried enabling the CheckStyle test for this. There were just
under three thousand errors.
I'm wondering if it is worth going through the code base fixing these.
On a related topic, I did notice several instance of the following:
if (a == b) ...
if (a == c) ...
if (a == d) ...
that could be more efficiently written as:
if (a == b) {
...
} else if (a == c) {
...
} else if (a == d) {
...
}
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
