Re: [cp-patches] RFC: Hashtable cleanup

[Robert Schuster]

Hi,
there was no patch attached.

cya
Robert

Roman Kennke wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
> I applied your suggested changes and committed the attached patch. I am
> going to commit the mentioned mauve test now.
> 
> 2006-01-11  Roman Kennke  <address@hidden>
> 
>         Reported by: Fridjof Siebert <address@hidden>
>         * java/util/Hashtable.java
>         (KEYS): Removed unneeded field.
>         (VALUES): Removed unneeded field.
>         (ENTRIES): Removed unneeded field.
>         (keys): Return a KeyEnumerator instance.
>         (elements): Returns a ValueEnumerator instance.
>         (toString): Use an EntryIterator instance.
>         (keySet): Return a KeyIterator instance.
>         (values): Return a ValueIterator instance.
>         (entrySet): Return an EntryIterator instance.
>         (hashCode): Use EntryIterator instance.
>         (rehash): Changed this loop to avoid redundant reads and make
>         it obvious that null checking is not needed.
>         (writeObject): Use EntryIterator instance.
>         (HashIterator): Removed class.
>         (Enumerator): Removed class.
>         (EntryIterator): New class.
>         (KeyIterator): New class.
>         (ValueIterator): New class.
>         (EntryEnumerator): New class.
>         (KeyEnumerator): New class.
>         (ValueEnumerator): New class.
> 
> /Roman
> 
> 
> Am Mittwoch, den 11.01.2006, 11:19 -0700 schrieb Tom Tromey:
> 
>>>>>>>"Roman" == Roman Kennke <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>Roman> So, should I check this in?
>>
>>Yes, but...
>>
>>Roman> +      if (idx <= 0) /* added this test to avoid
>>Roman> +                     * ArrayIndexOutOfBounds when Hashtable is
>>Roman> +                     * modified concurrently, return null in this
>>Roman> +                     * case.  see test
>>Roman> +                     * 
>>com.aicas.jamaica.testlet.bugdb.JB00310.EnumerateAndModify
>>Roman> +                     * --Fridi.  
>>Roman> +                     */
>>
>>A few nits about this: we don't usually use long end-of-line comments,
>>it would be better to have an inline comment before the test.  Also we
>>don't ordinarily mention people's names or reference test cases which
>>aren't in Mauve.
>>
>>Could you put that test case in Mauve?  That would be best since it
>>would be run by the regular regression tester.
>>
>>Roman> +   * appear in the enumeration.  The spec says nothing about this, but
>>Roman> +   * the "Java Class Libraries" book infers that modifications to the
>>
>>This should be 'implies', not 'infers'.  This occurs in a couple
>>places.
>>
>>To
> 
> m
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Classpath-patches mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature