From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15442 invoked by alias); 16 Feb 2003 16:44:55 -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 15435 invoked from network); 16 Feb 2003 16:44:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO delenn.fl.net.au) (202.181.0.28) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 16 Feb 2003 16:44:55 -0000 Received: from solomon (a5-p13.syd.fl.net.au [202.181.2.13]) by delenn.fl.net.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9125180483; Mon, 17 Feb 2003 03:52:22 +1100 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" From: "Raif S. Naffah" Reply-To: raif@fl.net.au To: Mark Wielaard Subject: Re: new test cases (long) Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 16:44:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 Cc: Mauve References: <200302090318.02317.raif@fl.net.au> <200302151101.21183.raif@fl.net.au> <1045396437.30179.522.camel@elsschot> In-Reply-To: <1045396437.30179.522.camel@elsschot> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200302170348.00588.raif@fl.net.au> X-SW-Source: 2003-q1/txt/msg00027.txt.bz2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160 hello Mark, On Sunday 16 February 2003 22:53, Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi Raif, > > Thanks for all the pointers. The character encoding names seem to be > confusing whatever way you look at it. What is and isn't a canonical > name, for what package, what the (historical) alias is, etc is > difficult to decipher. i agree it's somewhat confusing but we can reduce this by sticking to=20 the documentation and the behaviour of the implementation (sun's jdk=20 that is). > Also note that the 1.4 docs and 1.4.1 encoding docs actually list > different canonical names... Duh... where exactly does the 1.4 and the 1.4.1 differ? > Anyway I think the best thing todo is to add all canonical, > historical and/or alias must support character names to the > getBytes() tests, at least for the names that are documented on all > these different (versions) of the API/Spec pages. The distinction > between names used for java.lang/io and java.nio seems to only > confuse matters and > implementations that only support some names for some of the library > classes will probably confuse users enormously. another alternative is to stick to the distinction the javadocs makes=20 wrt. to the following aspects: * specific packages use specific, albeit sometimes, different=20 encoding/charset names; * some names are "canonical" others are "aliases," * some names are a MUST (Basic), others (the international version of=20 the JDK) are a MAY (Extended). this way, gnu.testlet.java.lang.String.getBytes can be the test point=20 for java.lang.* API encoding names, and something like (a new)=20 gnu.testlet.java.nio.charset.Charset.isSupported test would emulate the=20 same for the java.nio.* API encoding names. > So getBytes14 now tests US-ASCII, windows-1252, ISO-8859-1, > ISO-8859-15, ISO8859_15, UTF-16BE and UTF-16LE. Together with the > getBytes13 tests this should catch all the encoding names that people > will probaly always expect to be available in a normal class library > implementation. if my comments above are acceptable, i can revise the getBytes classes=20 to handle distinctly the last 2 points (canonical v/s alias, and basic=20 v/s extended), and write a new test case for java.nio.* API=20 conformance. the pass/fail requirements can then be controlled with an=20 'xfails' file. cheers; rsn -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Que du magnifique iD8DBQE+T8C++e1AKnsTRiERA2J5AJ4o4bgsAhoGEBXexLTKsGHeWor+JACg86St 6zTwX4j9FqzGExtFXFu3HDQ=3D =3Dn5zY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----