RE: <i18n dev> Review request for JDK-8066982: ZonedDateTime.parse()
returns wrong ZoneOffset around DST fall transition
Hi Roger,
The added import in DateTimeFormatter.java is because of the javadocs
entry - {@link ChronoLocalDateTime#atZone(ZoneId)}
Regards,
Ramanand.
*From:*Roger Riggs
*Sent:* Monday, December 14, 2015 8:36 PM
*To:* Ramanand Patil; core-libs-...@openjdk.java.net
*Cc:* i18n-dev@openjdk.java.net
*Subject:* Re: <i18n dev> Review request for JDK-8066982:
ZonedDateTime.parse() returns wrong ZoneOffset around DST fall transition
Hi Ramanand,
Thanks for the cleanup of the test.
On 12/14/2015 3:14 AM, Ramanand Patil wrote:
Hi Roger and all,
Please review the updated Webrev:
_http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntv/ramanand/8066982/webrev.02/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Entv/ramanand/8066982/webrev.02/>_
DateTimeFormatter.java has an added import that is unused and should
be removed.
Looks fine.
Thanks, Roger
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8066982
Roger, please see my comments about new tests:
- All my test methods were earlier generic with main method and hence
had///private static/qualifier. I have changed them now to match and
to be consistent with the existing tests. Thank you for pointing this.
- I agree with you on this. Particularly when we have tests around DST
we can’t avoid timezone data.
- I have defined dataProvider for every method and reduced the test
data for cases where zone is not
present(/testWithoutZoneWithoutOffset()/and///testWithOffsetWithoutZone()/).
But for the other 2 cases where zone is
present(/testWithZoneWithOffset()/and///testWithZoneWithoutOffset()/),
I feel most of the data cases are necessary and some are required to
be on safer side if in future the timezone rule changes. Also, this
bug fix mainly affects these cases.
I have created the dataProvider kepping in mind the below cases for 2
DST zones.
1. Time before overlap
2. Time during Overlap
3. Time after overlap
4. Valid Offsets for each of these times
5. Zero Offset for each time
6. Few Positive and negative invalid offsets for each time
Regards,
Ramanand.
-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Riggs
Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2015 1:37 AM
To: core-libs-...@openjdk.java.net <mailto:core-libs-...@openjdk.java.net>
Cc: i18n-dev@openjdk.java.net <mailto:i18n-dev@openjdk.java.net>
Subject: Re: <i18n dev> Review request for JDK-8066982:
ZonedDateTime.parse() returns wrong ZoneOffset around DST fall transition
Hi,
Stephen, can you confirm that the added text and test in
DateTimeFormatter is not a specification change?
Our processes have a bit more to do if it is a spec change and it
would limit the backport to JDK 8.
This bug fix will cause an existing TCK/JCK test to fail but that is
considered also a bug and is fixed.
test/java/time/tck/java/time/TCKZonedDateTime.java
Ramanand, some comments on the new test:
- The 'private' qualifier on the tests and data providers is not
used in the current tests and
is not consistently present in the new one.
Since it has little/no function, the tests would be a bit cleaner
without it.
- Typically, test that have data dependencies (such as the timezone
data) cannot be used for
compatibility to the specification, but the data is stable and it
seems unavoidable in this case.
- Are all of the data cases necessary to validate the specification?
Redundant cases extend the testing time without adding more
confidence to the quality.
Thanks, Roger
On 12/10/2015 11:00 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> I believe this is suitable for committing, thanks, other reviews welcome!
> Stephen
>
>
>
> On 10 December 2015 at 15:36, Ramanand Patil <ramanand.pa...@oracle.com
<mailto:ramanand.pa...@oracle.com>> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please review the updated webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8066982/webrev.01/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eaefimov/8066982/webrev.01/>
>>
>> I have modified the fix and test cases as per inputs given by Stephen. Also, I have
added the javadocs changes in this patch which were proposed in the bug.
>>
>> Bug link is: _https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8066982_
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ramanand.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stephen Colebourne [_mailto:scolebourne@joda.org_]
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 4:46 PM
>> To: core-libs-dev
>> Cc: i18n-dev
>> Subject: Re: <i18n dev> Review request for JDK-8066982:
>> ZonedDateTime.parse() returns wrong ZoneOffset around DST fall
>> transition
>>
>> The logic looks fine.
>>
>> In the main code, this part
>>.getLong(INSTANT_SECONDS);
>> can be replaced with
>>.toEpochSecond();
>> which will be slightly faster.
>>
>> In the test case, this part
>> .plus(15, ChronoUnit.MINUTES);
>> can be replaced with
>>.plusMinutes(15)
>>
>> And
>>.with(ChronoField.OFFSET_SECONDS,
>> ZoneOffset.of(offsetSamples[j]).getTotalSeconds())
>> can be replaced with
>>.with(ZoneOffset.of(offsetSamples[j]))
>>
>> In addition to the looping tests, I'd like to see the examples from the bug report
as test cases. Those tests would be simple to follow and explain,
whereas the looping tests are a little hard to follow.
>>
>> thanks for fixing this
>> Stephen
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9 December 2015 at 07:44, Ramanand Patil <ramanand.pa...@oracle.com
<mailto:ramanand.pa...@oracle.com>> wrote:
>>> HI all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please review a fix for Bug - HYPERLINK
>>> "_https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8066982_"JDK-8066982
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bug - Parsing a string with ZonedDateTime.parse() that contains zone offset and
zone ID "Europe/Berlin" returns a wrong ZonedDateAndTime (different
offset). This error starts exactly at the transition time (included)
and ends one hour later (excluded).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Webrev - _http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8066982/webrev.00/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eaefimov/8066982/webrev.00/>_
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> One existing test case in TCKZonedDateTime.java is also modified, because - when
offset is invalid the local time is changed to make the result valid.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ramanand.
