RFR: 8326718: Test java/util/Formatter/Padding.java does not timeout on large inputs before JDK-8299677

Raffaello Giulietti rgiulietti at openjdk.org
Wed Feb 28 14:46:58 UTC 2024


On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 20:37:03 GMT, Chad Rakoczy <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The fix in JDK-8299677 serves it's intended purpose but the test added with it does not test that. The original test does not timeout before or after the fix which is the issue.
>> 
>> "8326718: Test java/util/Formatter/Padding.java does not timeout on large inputs after JDK-8299677"
>> This is the expected case. Should the title be what the issue is or what the fix is? To me this sounds like the test should be timing out or was timing out after JDK-8299677
>> 
>> Maybe a better title is
>> "8326718: Test java/util/Formatter/Padding.java should timeout on large inputs before fix in JDK-8299677"
>
>> @chadrako The title of the issue should succinctly describe the problem at the time it is filed.
> 
> Then I feel like the current title is correct. The issue at the time of filing is that `Padding.java` does not timeout on large inputs before the fix (which is should but doesn't) that was implemented in JDK-8299677
> 
> I'm open to other's opinions on this as well

@chadrako OK, I now get what you mean with the description in the title.

Although it should be noted that the tests were introduced with JDK-8299677 and didn't exercise the large widths in the format specifications, so they could not timeout neither before nor after the fix as they were not tested.

So maybe yes, your second proposal
> Maybe a better title is
> "8326718: Test java/util/Formatter/Padding.java should timeout on large inputs before fix in JDK-8299677"
> 
sounds better.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18033#issuecomment-1969138311


More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list