Yes, that appears to explain the difference in behavior.
System.out.println(DateTimeZone.getDefault()) outputs:
1.5: tz: -05:00
1.6: tz: UTC
Is there a way to insulate the logic from the tz difference?
For now, it's only a unit test that fails due to different conversion of
a String into a DateTime using: DATETIME_FORMATTER.parseDateTime(...);
Thanks for all the helpful replies!
Dan
Maxim Veksler wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Dan Rollo <danro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Good point. Both jdk's are on the same Ubuntu machine. I assume the TZ's
>> are the same, as I never took any action to change them.
>>
>>
>
> This can be easily tested with System.out.println(DateTimeZone.getDefault());
>
> It is perhaps also possible that the time zones have been updated
> between the java versions, by Sun that is.
> Perhaps it's wise to test this with UTC time ?
>
>
> Maxim.
>
>> Brian S O'Neill wrote:
>>> What time zone? Are you sure that the default time zone for each JDK is
>>> the same?
>>>
>>> On 2010-02-24 10:09 PM, Dan Rollo wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I have found the following unit test passes with JDK 1.5, but fails with
>>>> 64-bit Sun JDK 1.6 (1.6.0.16).
>>>>
>>>> I've tested this with joda-time-1.4.jar and joda-time-1.6.jar.
>>>>
>>>> Can anyone else confirm the bug, and/or is there a workaround?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Dan Rollo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> public void testJodaDateTimeFormatter64bitJDK6() throws Exception {
>>>> final DateTime dateTime = DateTimeFormat.forPattern(
>>>> "yyyyMMddHHmmss"
>>>> ).parseDateTime("20001212050505");
>>>>
>>>> assertEquals("This joda time conversion fails under 64-bit JDK
>>>> 6 (1.6.0.16), and maybe others?",
>>>> 976615505000L, dateTime.getMillis());
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
>>>> Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
>>>> proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
>>>> See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
>>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Joda-interest mailing list
>>>> Joda-interest@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
>>> Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
>>> proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
>>> See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Joda-interest mailing list
>>> Joda-interest@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
>> Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
>> proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
>> See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> Joda-interest mailing list
>> Joda-interest@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
>>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Joda-interest mailing list
Joda-interest@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
