Skip to content

8319640: ClassicFormat::parseObject (from DateTimeFormatter) does not conform to the javadoc and may leak DateTimeException#16586

Closed
naotoj wants to merge 5 commits intoopenjdk:masterfrom
naotoj:JDK-8319640-ClassicFormat-parseObject
Closed

8319640: ClassicFormat::parseObject (from DateTimeFormatter) does not conform to the javadoc and may leak DateTimeException#16586
naotoj wants to merge 5 commits intoopenjdk:masterfrom
naotoj:JDK-8319640-ClassicFormat-parseObject

Conversation

@naotoj
Copy link
Member

@naotoj naotoj commented Nov 9, 2023 •
edited by openjdk bot
Loading

Fixing the Format::parseObject(String, ParsePosition) implementation in DateTimeFormatter class, to not throw DateTimeException but to return null.

Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8319640: ClassicFormat::parseObject (from DateTimeFormatter) does not conform to the javadoc and may leak DateTimeException (Bug - P4)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/16586/head:pull/16586
$ git checkout pull/16586

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/16586
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/16586/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 16586

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 16586

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16586.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Nov 9, 2023

👋 Welcome back naoto! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Nov 9, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 9, 2023

@naotoj The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • core-libs
  • i18n

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added core-libs core-libs-dev@openjdk.org i18n i18n-dev@openjdk.org labels Nov 9, 2023
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Nov 9, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Webrevs

RogerRiggs
RogerRiggs approved these changes Nov 9, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@RogerRiggs RogerRiggs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 9, 2023 •
edited
Loading

@naotoj This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8319640: ClassicFormat::parseObject (from DateTimeFormatter) does not conform to the javadoc and may leak DateTimeException

Reviewed-by: rriggs, iris, jlu, joehw

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 2 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • d992033: 8317562: [JFR] Compilation queue statistics
  • 965ae72: 8319753: Duration javadoc has "period" instead of "duration" in several places

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Nov 9, 2023
justin-curtis-lu
justin-curtis-lu approved these changes Nov 9, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@justin-curtis-lu justin-curtis-lu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

JoeWang-Java
JoeWang-Java reviewed Nov 10, 2023
View reviewed changes
test/jdk/java/time/test/java/time/format/TestDateTimeParsing.java Outdated
.optionalEnd()
.toFormatter(Locale.ROOT)
.toFormat();
assertEquals(f.parseObject("17-30", new ParsePosition(0)), null);
Copy link
Member

@JoeWang-Java JoeWang-Java Nov 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I might have missed it, but this test doesn't seem to exercise the situation where IOOBE would happen. Though the result would be the same as it catches RuntimeException always, I wonder whether an additional test case would be helpful to verify the IOOBE situation, e.g. set the position to be greater than the length.

Copy link
Member Author

@naotoj naotoj Nov 13, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, Joe. Added extra test for IOOBE.

Copy link
Member

@JoeWang-Java JoeWang-Java Nov 13, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, Naoto.

@naotoj
Copy link
Member Author

naotoj commented Nov 13, 2023

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 13, 2023

Going to push as commit fe0ccdf.
Since your change was applied there have been 3 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 1802cb5: 8319570: Change to GCC 13.2.0 for building on Linux at Oracle
  • d992033: 8317562: [JFR] Compilation queue statistics
  • 965ae72: 8319753: Duration javadoc has "period" instead of "duration" in several places

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Nov 13, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Nov 13, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Nov 13, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 13, 2023

@naotoj Pushed as commit fe0ccdf.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@irisclark irisclark irisclark approved these changes

+3 more reviewers

@RogerRiggs RogerRiggs RogerRiggs approved these changes

@justin-curtis-lu justin-curtis-lu justin-curtis-lu approved these changes

@JoeWang-Java JoeWang-Java JoeWang-Java approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

core-libs core-libs-dev@openjdk.org i18n i18n-dev@openjdk.org integrated Pull request has been integrated

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@naotoj @RogerRiggs @irisclark @justin-curtis-lu @JoeWang-Java