I have also traced down a couple of more such mistakes. Out of the ~1300 tests in Core, 80 are now failing... Getting there.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Niclas Hedhman <[email protected]> wrote: > Ah, ServiceTags are not an Interface.... And I misinterpreted the > flatten() in previous code. > > Committing. > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Niclas Hedhman <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> In fact, line 195 should be adding the top-most interface already. >> >> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Niclas Hedhman <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Yeah, I kind of figured that much out already. But I still can't spot >>> the difference from the old code. >>> >>> And not comfortable of just adding it. >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 6:53 AM, Kent Sølvsten <[email protected] >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Debugger tells that the bug is inside Classes#TYPES_OF. >>>> >>>> The old implementation returned both interfaces and parent classes for a >>>> class, - the new implementation returns only interfaces. >>>> The effect is that we only store the ServiceTags under metaInfo keyed by >>>> the Serializable interface, and thus are unable to find it. >>>> >>>> Who will be first to fix it? >>>> >>>> /Kent >>>> >>>> Den 26-08-2015 kl. 17:33 skrev Niclas Hedhman: >>>> > Gang, >>>> > >>>> > I want to give you an update on how it is going... >>>> > >>>> > In essence, I have completed the first round of massive changes, >>>> where most >>>> > of the internals are using Stream API instead of the Iterable system >>>> from >>>> > Rickard. >>>> > It compiles and some non-trivial tests pass. >>>> > >>>> > BUT, I must have messed up some of the functions, because withTags() >>>> > doesn't work anymore. When the withTags() are to be converted into a >>>> > ServiceTags instance and placed into MetaInfo, something goes wrong >>>> and >>>> > ServiceTags are never added. This breaks a LOT of tests, due to "json" >>>> > tagging on ValueSerialization, and I haven't stumbled upon breaking >>>> for >>>> > other reasons, so fixing this could(!) clear up a massive number of >>>> tests >>>> > in one go. >>>> > >>>> > I also note that the Build Passes, even though most tests fail. That >>>> can't >>>> > be right... >>>> > >>>> > I am committing and pushing this anyway, in case someone has time to >>>> look >>>> > at this detail tonight or tomorrow, as I need to run around with other >>>> > things quite a lot, for my move to Shanghai. >>>> > >>>> > So, my guess is that CI will break and start making noise. >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer >>> http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer >> http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java >> > > > > -- > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java > -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
