On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 11:43:25 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <[email protected]> wrote:
>> test/jdk/java/net/httpclient/EmptyAuthenticate.java line 83:
>>
>>> 81:
>>> responseHeaders.firstValue(WWW_AUTH_HEADER_NAME).orElse(null),
>>> 82: () -> "was expecting empty `%s` header in:
>>> %s".formatted(
>>> 83: WWW_AUTH_HEADER_NAME,
>>> responseHeaders.map()));
>>
>> Hello Volkan, this appears to be the opposite of what the original test case
>> was expecting. Before this change, we had:
>>
>> boolean ok = !response.headers().firstValue("WWW-Authenticate").isEmpty();
>> if (!ok) {
>> throw new RuntimeException("WWW-Authenticate missing");
>> }
>>
>> So the test was expecting the response header value to be non-empty unlike
>> this updated version. Did I misread the code?
>
> I'm guessing that this test passes for you locally. If so, then we might need
> some additional investigation here as to why it passes (given the exact
> opposite assertion of what the test was previously asserting).
>
> I see that the original test was using lower case response header in the
> server handler and on the client side the test was reading a upper case
> response header. In this updated version, we use the upper case header
> consistently in both the handler and the client. You might want to check the
> original issue https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8263899 to see if the case
> of the header was playing a role in this test.
firstValue(name) returns an Optional, so we were just testing that the Optional
was not empty :-).
Now we're additionally checking that the value is the empty string.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24542#discussion_r2035226225
