This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Mauve project.
Re: Java 1.2
>>>>> "Aaron" == Aaron M Renn <email@example.com> writes:
Aaron> You do bring up an interesting case. I believe one assumption
Aaron> of the test selection script is that Java 1.2 includes all Java
Aaron> 1.0 and Java 1.1 tests. For items such as these which test
Aaron> that interfaces are defined correctly at a particular spec
Aaron> level, this assumption is not valid.
I believe you can write a tags line like:
// Tags: JDK1.1 !JDK1.2
and that will do the right thing -- include the test when 1.1 is
specified, but not when 1.2 is specified.
I don't know anything about java.sql and wouldn't be comfortable
making the change myself.
Aaron> I'm not sure what you mean by character sets, but there are
Aaron> still some unresolved errors being reported out of the
Aaron> java.lang.Character test. It reports over 100 errors for the
Aaron> JDK implementation. Part of this is because we use the latest
Aaron> and greatest Unicode spec, while Sun uses an outdated one.
Aaron> Others may be bugs in the test script or the Java
Yes, all three probably apply:
* Sun's JDK 1.0 and JDK 1.1 use an outdated Unicode spec.
I think we should just let these remain errors.
* Sun's JDK 1.0 and 1.1 (haven't tried 1.2) have bugs in their
* I once wrote Sun and asked about the apparently self-contradictory
documentation in the online 1.2 docs for Character.isLower. Their
reply is that the `Ll' rule applies and the rest is just expository.
This means there is a bug in the current test suite (if you believe
their reply, which I occasionally do not).
I haven't had the time to look into this yet.
The Character tests are really the most problematic. Sun's
documentation is lacking, and so I sometimes picked what I thought was
the most reasonable and useful behavior. Perhaps we should just aim
for 1.2 compatibility (excluding whatever obvious bugs we might find).
>> 2) Who deceides what is correct for DecimalFormat. ( documentation
>> or Current JDK1.2 implimentation?)
Aaron> I'm not familiar with the test for this class. However, we
Aaron> should base our tests on the documentation unless there is some
Aaron> reason to believe it is wrong. (A typo, for example). Sun's
Aaron> implementation has bugs, and we should not require bug for bug
Aaron> A certain level of compatibility is desireable though.
I agree. There is a fair amount of gray in the picture, since Sun's
documentation isn't all that great (parts are better than others).
When writing new java.text tests (java.text has particularly poor
documentation), I've been trying to test things which are more or less
unambiguous. I might have failed -- this, like everything, is up for
discussion, patches, etc.
For DecimalFormat, I ran my test cases against our implementation and
against JDK 1.1.6 (I think -- or was it 1.1.5?). Feel free to report
specific problems! I don't have JDK 1.2 yet.
Aaron> That would be excellent. If you write anything, please send it
Aaron> to Anthony Green or Tom Tromey at Cygnus. Patches to existing
Aaron> tests can be posted to the list for now.
Yeah, send them on out. If you write more than a few, we'll see about
getting you direct cvs access.