From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13271 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2003 09:48:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mauve-discuss-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: mauve-discuss-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 13131 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2003 09:48:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web10008.mail.yahoo.com) (216.136.130.44) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 20 Jan 2003 09:48:53 -0000 Message-ID: <20030120094853.27854.qmail@web10008.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [149.225.130.87] by web10008.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:48:53 PST Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 09:48:00 -0000 From: Dalibor Topic Subject: Re: 600+ BigDecimal tests To: Anthony Green , Stephen Crawley Cc: Mark Wielaard , Dalibor Topic , mauve-discuss@sources.redhat.com, crawley@piglet.dstc.edu.au In-Reply-To: <1043021531.2354.27.camel@escape> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-q1/txt/msg00010.txt.bz2 --- Anthony Green wrote: > On Sun, 2003-01-19 at 15:39, Stephen Crawley wrote: > > * Some of the other tests check exception > message strings, and are > > failing because the messages are different. > > > > I don't know whether this is a bug or not. Is > Classpath aiming to > > give the same exception messages as the Sun JDK > implementation ??? > > I don't think so (could be wrong). I suppose we > should remove these > tests. I'd vote for a change to catch the exception and ignore the message. After all, free implementations may (have) come up with more understandable, localized, superior messages to those provided by Sun's implementation. It would be counterproductive to force them to change them to Sun's version. > > > > * The 'has001' failure is due to differences in > the way that > > Classpath and the SUN JDK are calculating > hashcodes. > > > > I don't know whether this is a bug or not. Is > Classpath aiming to > > give the same hash code values as the Sun JDK > implementation ??? > > I know that some people have spent time figuring out > how Sun hashes > various objects, although I don't know if this is a > policy. I think the essential question here is: can having different hash methods bite you in some way? Beside obvious hashing performance considerations, I doubt it. best regards, dalibor topic __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com