RFR:JDK-8079628:java.time: DateTimeFormatter containing "DD" fails on 3-digit day-of-year value

[nadeesh tv]

Hi all,

Please see the updated webrev 
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntv/8079628/webrev.02/

Thanks and Regards,
Nadeesh TV

On 4/28/2016 8:17 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> My mistake on the spec for "DD". It should be SignStyle.NOT_NEGATIVE,
> not NORMAL.
>
> I'd like to see a test that checks adjacent value parsing works
> correctly for "DDD". ie. yyyyDDDHHmm should be able to parse into a
> LocalDateTime where the date-time value can be checked against the
> input string.
>
> I think this will be a good fix once complete.
> thanks
> Stephen
>
> On 28 April 2016 at 14:10, nadeesh tv <nadeesh.tv at oracle.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thanks Stephen for the comments.
>>
>> Please see the updated webrev
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntv/8079628/webrev.01/
>>
>> Regards,
>> Nadeesh TV
>>
>> On 4/26/2016 5:42 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>>> This change introduces inconsistencies and problems. For example, it
>>> will parse up to 19 digits for "D" but only up to 2 digits for "d".
>>> The following would be better:
>>>
>>>        *    D       1      appendValue(ChronoField.DAY_OF_YEAR)
>>>        *    DD      2      appendValue(ChronoField.DAY_OF_YEAR, 2, 3,
>>> SignStyle.NORMAL)
>>>        *    DDD     3      appendValue(ChronoField.DAY_OF_YEAR, 3)
>>>
>>> This limits the accepted input to 3 digits, which is quite sufficient
>>> here. It is also clearer for the common "D" and "DDD" cases.
>>>
>>> Note that a test case needs to cover adjacent value parsing for
>>> day-of-year. This pattern "yyyyDDD" should be tested and work. With
>>> the webrev changes, it will not work as adjacent value parsing mode
>>> will not be triggered.
>>>
>>> (The change will alter the meaning of "yyyyDD" but no-one should be
>>> using that anyway as it is broken, only working for the first 99 days
>>> of the year.)
>>>
>>> The code in TCKDateTimeFormatterBuilder needs a blank line after the
>>> new methods.
>>>
>>> Stephen
>>>
>>>
>>> On 26 April 2016 at 12:48, nadeesh tv <nadeesh.tv at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Please  review a fix for
>>>>
>>>> Bug ID -   https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8079628
>>>>
>>>> Issue -  Pattern 'D' is not implemented as intended by CLDR
>>>>
>>>> Solution - Changed the definition of 'D' to D..D 1..3
>>>> appendValue(ChronoField.DAY_OF_YEAR, n, 19, SignStyle.NORMAL)
>>>>
>>>> Webrev -  http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntv/8079628/webrev.00/
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thanks and Regards,
>>>> Nadeesh TV
>>>>
>> --
>> Thanks and Regards,
>> Nadeesh TV
>>

-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Nadeesh TV