[threeten-dev] Review fix for periodUntil issue 273

[Xueming Shen]

(1) "public" is also not needed for interface method
(2) ChronoDateImpl#332:
      LocalDate.periodUntil() has requirenonNull(endDate...) before throwing DTE, to be consistent?

otherwise looks fine.

On 03/01/2013 02:56 PM, roger riggs wrote:
> Revised the webrev:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-fix-perioduntil-273/
>
> Thanks, Roger
>
> On 3/1/2013 2:40 PM, Xueming Shen wrote:
>> while we are on this, it appears two ChronoLocalDate.periodUntil() methods
>> are declared as "public abstract ...", any particular reason to do that? or just
>> a "leftover" of the previous life of CLD as an abstract class, instead of an interface
>> now?
>>
>> On 03/01/2013 10:25 AM, Xueming Shen wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3/1/13 9:41 AM, Xueming Shen wrote:
>>>> -ChronoDateImple.periodUntil(t, u)
>>>>   The "convention" is to align the "case" to the "switch" in jdk source code?
>>>>
>>>> - Understood it is kinda of 310 convention to have "... == false", but I would suggest to
>>>>    use the the normal (! X) instead.
>>>>
>>>> -ChronoLocalDate.periodUntil(CLD) says the "calculation is performed using the chronology
>>>>   of this date. If necessary, the input date will be converted to match" (btw, there are two
>>>>   "the"s here), but all our 4 jdk-provided ChronoLocalDate only handle "same type" of CLD
>>>
>>> I meant to say 3.
>>>
>>>
>>>>   now,  (their java doc currently simply is inherited from the super class). Is it possible to have
>>>>   a better alternative? at least they all have a isodate.
>>>>
>>>> -Sherman
>>>>