Code Review Request for Bug #4802647

[Brandon Passanisi]

Hi Jason.  Thanks for your response.  I was thinking about how I can 
improve the test using your suggestion. I could possibly do the following:

    1. Find all of the subclasses of AbstractCollection which override
    removeAll(Collection<?>) and which also contain the spec language
    which specifies that NullPointerException is thrown if the specified
    collection is null.

    2. Find all of the subclasses of AbstractCollection which override
    retainAll(Collection<?>) and which also contain the spec language
    which specifies that NullPointerException is thrown if the specified
    collection is null.

    3. Add the classes found in #1 and #2 to the test.

    4. If any of the new classes added because of  #3 result in a test
    failure, it might be a good idea to file a new bug as Bug #4802647
    specifically mentions subclasses of AbstractCollection which do not
    override remainAll, retainAll.

    5. The public subclasses of AbstractCollection which do not override
    removeAll, retainAll (probably) shouldn't be included in the test as
    the currently existing NewAbstractCollection represents this scenario.

What do you think?

Thanks.

On 11/30/2011 2:04 PM, Jason Mehrens wrote:
> Brandon,
>
> > Are there any opinions on this from other Collections experts?
> > >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mduigou/4802647/0/webrev/ 
> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Emduigou/4802647/0/webrev/>
>
> Shouldn't the test include all collections included with the JDK?  Any 
> override of these methods could repeat the same (bad) behavior.
>
> Jason

-- 
Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
Brandon Passanisi | Principle Member of Technical Staff

Oracle Java Standards Conformance

Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to 
developing practices and products that help protect the environment