Kindly reminder.
On 02.08.2016 20:25, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote:
Pavel, Chris,
thank you for you replays. I believe I addressed all Pavel's comments
except the one mentioned by Chris below. I saw tests with a really
long bug list in @bug so I think it's a good practice to avoid testbug
numbers. Hope it is not critical.
I also switched back from Writer to OutputStream to reproduce original
test scenario.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~snikandrova/8162876/webrev.01/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Esnikandrova/8162876/webrev.01/>
Thank you,
Svetlana
On 01.08.2016 22:31, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 1 Aug 2016, at 12:03, Pavel Rappo <pavel.ra...@oracle.com> wrote:
... return len;
5. I believe we should add 8162876 to @bug
Strictly speaking, we should not. The @bug should capture the bug
numbers
that the test exercises the changes for. It is not necessary to
include the bug
number for a bug to the test itself.
25 * @bug 4937598
Otherwise I find this version to be more robust and readable.
+1
-Chris.
