[GitHub] [jmeter] undera commented on pull request #693: ci: add randomized matrix for better test coverage

undera commented on PR #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/jmeter/pull/693#issuecomment-1303868676 > Why are you so sure `hashCode` is always different? There are at most 2**32 different `hashCode` values, so sometimes `hashCode` will collide. I went through your code piece under

[GitHub] [jmeter] vlsi commented on pull request #693: ci: add randomized matrix for better test coverage

vlsi commented on PR #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/jmeter/pull/693#issuecomment-1303987270 > The statement about 1/(2**32) event as sufficiently frequent does not sound to me According to the [birthday

[GitHub] [jmeter] undera commented on pull request #693: ci: add randomized matrix for better test coverage

undera commented on PR #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/jmeter/pull/693#issuecomment-1303864392 > Did you perform `export _JAVA_OPTIONS="-XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions -XX:hashCode=2"` before running "master branch code"? No I did not. I don't understand what that option does

[GitHub] [jmeter] undera commented on pull request #693: ci: add randomized matrix for better test coverage

undera commented on PR #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/jmeter/pull/693#issuecomment-1304269320 I'm not sure where this discussion go to. Do we discuss Java's `hashCode` being unreliable? I thought it's about some issue inside JMeter, though that issue does not show up in current

[GitHub] [jmeter] vlsi opened a new pull request, #5727: ci: add randomized matrix for better test coverage defect, TestElement.contentEquals edition

vlsi opened a new pull request, #5727: URL: https://github.com/apache/jmeter/pull/5727 This is an alternative implementation for https://github.com/apache/jmeter/pull/693 The key difference is that I create `TestElement.contentEquals` and mark `TestElement.equals` deprecated. --

[GitHub] [jmeter] weisJ commented on pull request #5715: Update darklaf to version 3.0.2

weisJ commented on PR #5715: URL: https://github.com/apache/jmeter/pull/5715#issuecomment-1304327759 All fixes I’m currently working on only regard some erroneous warning messages or the svg implementation. Both don’t apply to JMeter, so the current darklaf version should be good to go.

[GitHub] [jmeter] eric-wk-wong opened a new issue, #5726: Apache Commons Text (Text4Shell) Vulnerability

eric-wk-wong opened a new issue, #5726: URL: https://github.com/apache/jmeter/issues/5726 I was unsure if this was resolved yet by version 5.5 - can you please confirm? Reference: .\apache-jmeter-5.4.1\apache-jmeter-5.4.1\lib\commons-text-1.9.jar -- This is an automated

[GitHub] [jmeter] undera commented on pull request #693: ci: add randomized matrix for better test coverage

undera commented on PR #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/jmeter/pull/693#issuecomment-1303780800 I took the code snippet you suggested and it works fine for me (on master branch), just as expected, because the `hashCode()` is different. IMO the example with `HashSet` behaves exactly

[GitHub] [jmeter] vlsi commented on pull request #693: ci: add randomized matrix for better test coverage

vlsi commented on PR #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/jmeter/pull/693#issuecomment-1303823814 >because the hashCode() is different. Why are you so sure `hashCode` is always different? There are at most 2**32 different `hashCode` values, so sometimes `hashCode` will collide.

[GitHub] [jmeter] vlsi commented on pull request #693: ci: add randomized matrix for better test coverage

vlsi commented on PR #693: URL: https://github.com/apache/jmeter/pull/693#issuecomment-1303824874 > Also, if I open bin/testfiles/BUG_62847.jmx and re-save it with master branch code Did you perform `export _JAVA_OPTIONS="-XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions -XX:hashCode=2"` before