8253459: Formatter treats index, width and precision > Integer.MAX_VALUE incorrectly #516

igraves · 2020-10-05T22:23:56Z

The java.util.Formatter format specifies support for field widths, argument indexes, or precision lengths of a field that relate to the variadic arguments supplied to the formatter. These numbers are specified by integers, sometimes negative. For argument index, it's specified in the documentation that the highest allowed argument is limited by the largest possible index of an array (ie the largest possible variadic index), but for the other two it's not defined. Moreover, what happens when a number field in a string is too large or too small to be represented by a 32-bit integer type is not defined.

This fix adds documentation to specify what error behavior occurs during these cases. Additionally it adds an additional exception type to throw when an invalid argument index is observed.

A CSR will be required for this PR.

Progress

Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue
Change must be properly reviewed

Testing

	Linux aarch64	Linux arm	Linux ppc64le	Linux s390x	Linux x64	Linux x86	Windows x64	macOS x64
Build	✔️ (1/1 passed)	✔️ (1/1 passed)	✔️ (1/1 passed)	✔️ (1/1 passed)	✔️ (5/5 passed)	✔️ (2/2 passed)	✔️ (2/2 passed)	✔️ (2/2 passed)
Test (tier1)					✔️ (9/9 passed)	✔️ (9/9 passed)	✔️ (9/9 passed)	✔️ (9/9 passed)

Issue

JDK-8253459: Formatter treats index, width and precision > Integer.MAX_VALUE incorrectly

Reviewers

Roger Riggs (@RogerRiggs - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 223282d
Stuart Marks (@stuart-marks - Reviewer)

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/516/head:pull/516
$ git checkout pull/516

bridgekeeper · 2020-10-05T22:24:16Z

👋 Welcome back igraves! 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 · 2020-10-05T22:25:32Z

@igraves 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.

igraves · 2020-10-05T22:28:00Z

/csr needed

openjdk · 2020-10-05T22:28:22Z

@igraves this pull request will not be integrated until the CSR request JDK-8253875 for issue JDK-8253459 has been approved.

mlbridge · 2020-10-05T22:31:48Z

Webrevs

12: Full - Incremental (78fc817)
11: Full - Incremental (223282d)
10: Full - Incremental (36e8d3a)
09: Full - Incremental (03d5594)
08: Full - Incremental (aaa35af)
07: Full - Incremental (5a0effe)
06: Full (4bcb053)
05: Full - Incremental (a84d3f2f93cbb0889f3732c0d38a189cd05f716d)
04: Full - Incremental (0526ef43ae109b4ae614bc584721f30d7b1b62ee)
03: Full - Incremental (9b07ef33b6e07afae1a8bfa034200eb3aab1f94f)
02: Full (391449a82f18bdfb6af3f30f29d77164341c808c)
01: Full - Incremental (33bf7a14ad0a6dd1acb16afc46ae9c1ac81acc1d)
00: Full (f2af81f6f9f5923b6e2d22f0c4ab1912f13565ef)

RogerRiggs

Is the new exception type useful? yes, it matches the previous pattern.
But it does not (and none of the IllegalFormatException subclasses) produce a readable message with the offending value. So the developer will not see anything useful.
The fine grained exceptions provide little value.

igraves · 2020-10-06T19:10:46Z

I've been on the fence about this, personally. The Formatter uses pretty fine-grained exception types for error conditions. I'd be okay discontinuing this practice here, but am not sure what to replace this with. Perhaps we enable IllegalFormatException to be, itself, public and instantiable ?

mlbridge · 2020-10-15T02:32:10Z

Mailing list message from Jason Mehrens on i18n-dev:

Ian,

Should IllegalFormatArgumentIndexException.java provide an override of getMessage? It appears that is done in the following:

https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9b07ef33b6e07afae1a8bfa034200eb3aab1f94f/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IllegalFormatWidthException.java
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/9b07ef33b6e07afae1a8bfa034200eb3aab1f94f/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IllegalFormatPrecisionException.java

Otherwise the index won't be rendered when toString or printStackTrace is invoked.

Jason

________________________________________
From: core-libs-dev <core-libs-dev-retn at openjdk.java.net> on behalf of Ian Graves <igraves at openjdk.java.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 1:39 PM
To: core-libs-dev at openjdk.java.net; i18n-dev at openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: 8253459: Formatter treats index, width and precision > Integer.MAX_VALUE incorrectly [v4]

The `java.util.Formatter` format specifies support for field widths, argument indexes, or precision lengths of a field
that relate to the variadic arguments supplied to the formatter. These numbers are specified by integers, sometimes
negative. For argument index, it's specified in the documentation that the highest allowed argument is limited by the
largest possible index of an array (ie the largest possible variadic index), but for the other two it's not defined.
Moreover, what happens when a number field in a string is too large or too small to be represented by a 32-bit integer
type is not defined. This fix adds documentation to specify what error behavior occurs during these cases.
Additionally it adds an additional exception type to throw when an invalid argument index is observed. A CSR will be
required for this PR.

Ian Graves has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

Tweaking verbiage

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

Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/516/files
- new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/516/files/391449a8..9b07ef33

Webrevs:
- full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk&pr=516&range=03
- incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk&pr=516&range=02-03

Stats: 18 lines in 2 files changed: 0 ins; 5 del; 13 mod
Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/516.diff
Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/516/head:pull/516

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/516

Marcono1234

Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

Marcono1234 · 2020-10-24T22:59:53Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Formatter.java

+ *
+ * <p> Values of <i>width</i> must be in the range one to
+ * {@link Integer#MAX_VALUE}, inclusive, otherwise
+ * {@link IllegalFormatWidthException} will be thrown


Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

Marcono1234 · 2020-10-24T23:03:14Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Formatter.java

+ * {@link IllegalFormatWidthException} will be thrown
+ * Note that widths can appear to have a negative value, but the negative sign
+ * is a <i>flag</i>. For example in the format string {@code "%-20s"} the
+ * <i>width</i> is <i>20</i> and the <i>flag</i> is "-".</p>


Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

Marcono1234 · 2020-10-24T23:04:39Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Formatter.java

@@ -2783,8 +2799,11 @@ private int index(String s, int start, int end) {
                try {
                    // skip the trailing '$'
                    index = Integer.parseInt(s, start, end - 1, 10);
+                    if(index <= 0) {


Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

Marcono1234 · 2020-10-24T23:09:11Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IllegalFormatArgumentIndexException.java

+ * Unchecked exception thrown when the argument index is not within the valid
+ * range of supported argument index values. If an index value isn't
+ * representable by an {@code int} type, then the value
+ * {@code Integer.MIN_VALUE} will be used in the exception.


Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

Marcono1234 · 2020-10-24T23:09:33Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IllegalFormatArgumentIndexException.java

+
+    /**
+     * Gets the value of the illegal index.
+     * Returns {@code Integer.MIN_VALUE} if the illegal index is not


Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

Marcono1234 · 2020-10-24T23:18:24Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IllegalFormatPrecisionException.java

@@ -28,7 +28,9 @@
 /**
 * Unchecked exception thrown when the precision is a negative value other than
 * {@code -1}, the conversion does not support a precision, or the value is


Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

Marcono1234 · 2020-10-24T23:19:18Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IllegalFormatWidthException.java

@@ -27,7 +27,9 @@

 /**
 * Unchecked exception thrown when the format width is a negative value other
- * than {@code -1} or is otherwise unsupported.
+ * than {@code -1} or is otherwise unsupported. If a given format width is not


Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

Marcono1234 · 2020-10-24T23:21:59Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IllegalFormatArgumentIndexException.java

+    }
+
+    /**
+     * Gets the value of the illegal index.


Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

Marcono1234 · 2020-10-24T23:24:15Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Formatter.java

@@ -2783,8 +2799,11 @@ private int index(String s, int start, int end) {
                try {
                    // skip the trailing '$'
                    index = Integer.parseInt(s, start, end - 1, 10);
+                    if(index <= 0) {


Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

Marcono1234 · 2020-10-24T23:28:34Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Formatter.java

+ * is a <i>flag</i>. For example in the format string {@code "%-20s"} the
+ * <i>width</i> is <i>20</i> and the <i>flag</i> is "-".</p>
+ *
+ * <p> Values of <i>index</i> must be in the range one to


Hi @Marcono1234, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user Marcono1234 for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

openjdk · 2020-11-13T22:29:24Z

⚠️ @igraves This pull request contains merges that bring in commits not present in the target repository. Since this is not a "merge style" pull request, these changes will be squashed when this pull request in integrated. If this is your intention, then please ignore this message. If you want to preserve the commit structure, you must change the title of this pull request to Merge <project>:<branch> where <project> is the name of another project in the OpenJDK organization (for example Merge jdk:master).

igraves · 2020-11-13T23:10:15Z

Updates (including cleaning up some git weirdness with rebasing) include adherence to the new CSR draft proposal. This makes the new exception type package-private.

RogerRiggs · 2020-11-17T21:16:05Z

test/jdk/java/util/IllegalFormatException/ArgumentIndexException.java

+                return;
+            }
+        }
+        throw new RuntimeException("Expected IllegalFormatException for zero argument index.");


The wording of errors around exceptions can be misinterpreted. Did an expected exception occur or not?
If all you saw was the exception without the line of code, would it be unambiguous?

RogerRiggs · 2020-11-17T21:17:49Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Formatter.java

@@ -2783,8 +2799,11 @@ private int index(String s, int start, int end) {
                try {
                    // skip the trailing '$'
                    index = Integer.parseInt(s, start, end - 1, 10);
+                    if(index <= 0) {


Add a space after 'if' please.

RogerRiggs · 2020-11-17T21:21:47Z

test/jdk/java/util/IllegalFormatException/ArgumentIndexException.java

@@ -0,0 +1,98 @@
+/*


Typically, using the TestNG framework is preferable for new tests.
In addition to a convenient set of Asserts that check and print expected vs actual and message
it includes patterns for testing for expected exceptions.

Yes, these tests are amenable to TestNG's assertThrows method. That might be all you need; we generally aren't too concerned about the exact content and formatting of the exception's message. However, if you want to make additional assertions over the thrown exception, it can be obtained using expectThrows instead of assertThrows.

RogerRiggs · 2020-11-17T21:22:20Z

test/jdk/java/util/IllegalFormatException/ArgumentIndexException.java

+        throw new RuntimeException("Expected IllegalFormatException for non-representable precision.");
+    }
+
+}


Add a newline at end-of-file.

RogerRiggs · 2020-11-17T21:40:50Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IllegalFormatArgumentIndexException.java

+    @Override
+    public String getMessage() {
+        return String.format("Illegal format argument index = %d", getIndex());
+    }


The exception with a very large negative number isn't going to easy to recognize.
Can the exception message say (for the Integer.MIN_VALUE) that the index is not valid index.
Its probably too much to ask have an indication where in the format string the offending index occurs.

RogerRiggs · 2020-11-18T22:30:21Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IllegalFormatArgumentIndexException.java

+        int index = getIndex();
+
+        if (index == Integer.MIN_VALUE) {
+           return "Format argument index: (unrepresentable as int)";


Perhaps "(not representable as int)" is more readable.

After reading it a few times, I agree.

openjdk · 2020-11-18T22:31:31Z

@igraves 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:

8253459: Formatter treats index, width and precision > Integer.MAX_VALUE incorrectly

Reviewed-by: rriggs, smarks

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 87 new commits pushed to the master branch:

b9db002: 8256682: JDK-8202343 is incomplete
b8244b6: 8236926: Concurrently uncommit memory in G1
defdd12: 8142984: Zero: fast accessors should handle both getters and setters
1718aba: 8227400: Adjust jib profiles to make 3rd party tools for creating installers available on Mach5 test machines
9bb8223: 8253299: Manifest bytes are read twice when verifying a signed JAR
580f22c: 8256581: Refactor vector conversion tests
675d1d5: 8256516: Simplify clearing References
ba721f5: 8212879: Make JVMTI TagMap table concurrent
3a4b90f: 8202343: Disable TLS 1.0 and 1.1
342ccf6: 8256253: Defer Biased Locking obsoletion to JDK 18
... and 77 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/1e9a432d59fa3fb3d038c83c88fd7eeb3052960c...master

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.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@RogerRiggs, @stuart-marks) but any other Committer may sponsor as well.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

stuart-marks · 2020-11-19T00:38:49Z

test/jdk/java/util/IllegalFormatException/TestFormatSpecifierBounds.java

+        IllegalFormatException e = expectThrows(IllegalFormatException.class, () -> {
+            String r = String.format("%2147483648$s", "A", "B");
+        });
+        //assertEquals(e.getMessage(), "Illegal format argument index = " + Integer.MIN_VALUE);


Extraneous comment?

So it would seem!

igraves · 2020-11-19T19:42:23Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2020-11-19T19:43:17Z

@igraves
Your change (at version 78fc817) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

stuart-marks · 2020-11-19T20:20:17Z

/sponsor

openjdk · 2020-11-19T20:21:14Z

@stuart-marks @igraves Since your change was applied there have been 87 commits pushed to the master branch:

b9db002: 8256682: JDK-8202343 is incomplete
b8244b6: 8236926: Concurrently uncommit memory in G1
defdd12: 8142984: Zero: fast accessors should handle both getters and setters
1718aba: 8227400: Adjust jib profiles to make 3rd party tools for creating installers available on Mach5 test machines
9bb8223: 8253299: Manifest bytes are read twice when verifying a signed JAR
580f22c: 8256581: Refactor vector conversion tests
675d1d5: 8256516: Simplify clearing References
ba721f5: 8212879: Make JVMTI TagMap table concurrent
3a4b90f: 8202343: Disable TLS 1.0 and 1.1
342ccf6: 8256253: Defer Biased Locking obsoletion to JDK 18
... and 77 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/1e9a432d59fa3fb3d038c83c88fd7eeb3052960c...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit 080c707.

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

…LUE incorrectly Reviewed-by: rriggs, smarks

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Oct 5, 2020

openjdk bot added core-libs core-libs-dev@openjdk.org i18n i18n-dev@openjdk.org labels Oct 5, 2020

openjdk bot added the csr Pull request needs approved CSR before integration label Oct 5, 2020

RogerRiggs reviewed Oct 6, 2020

View reviewed changes

igraves force-pushed the format-string-numeric-bound branch from 33bf7a1 to d4c3e37 Compare October 12, 2020 21:56

Marcono1234 reviewed Oct 25, 2020

View reviewed changes

igraves added 7 commits November 13, 2020 17:02

Updating docs and throwing errors accordingly

b01733c

Updating docs

ff5edb1

Throwing exceptions for zeroth indexes

b6261a4

Updating docs specifying exception for 0 indices

586bccf

Tweaking verbiage

c9ecf6a

Additional specificity around width

1db0bac

Making IllegalFormatArgumentIndexException package private

4bcb053

igraves force-pushed the format-string-numeric-bound branch from a84d3f2 to 4bcb053 Compare November 13, 2020 23:06

Moving additional methods to package private

5a0effe

openjdk bot removed the csr Pull request needs approved CSR before integration label Nov 13, 2020

Adding test coverage. Tweaking wording in docs.

aaa35af

RogerRiggs reviewed Nov 17, 2020

View reviewed changes

igraves added 2 commits November 18, 2020 14:54

Docfixes, exception messages, formatting and moving tests to testng

03d5594

Exception message tweak

36e8d3a

RogerRiggs approved these changes Nov 18, 2020

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Nov 18, 2020

'unrepresentable' to 'not representable'

223282d

RogerRiggs approved these changes Nov 18, 2020

View reviewed changes

stuart-marks approved these changes Nov 19, 2020

View reviewed changes

Comment cleanup

78fc817

openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Nov 19, 2020

stuart-marks approved these changes Nov 19, 2020

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot closed this Nov 19, 2020

openjdk bot added integrated Pull request has been integrated and removed sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Nov 19, 2020

openjdk-notifier bot referenced this pull request Nov 19, 2020

8253459: Formatter treats index, width and precision > Integer.MAX_VA…

080c707

…LUE incorrectly Reviewed-by: rriggs, smarks

8253459: Formatter treats index, width and precision > Integer.MAX_VALUE incorrectly #516

8253459: Formatter treats index, width and precision > Integer.MAX_VALUE incorrectly #516

igraves commented Oct 5, 2020 •

edited by openjdk bot

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 5, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 5, 2020

igraves commented Oct 5, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 5, 2020

mlbridge bot commented Oct 5, 2020 •

edited

RogerRiggs left a comment •

edited

igraves commented Oct 6, 2020

mlbridge bot commented Oct 15, 2020

Marcono1234 left a comment •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

openjdk bot commented Nov 13, 2020

igraves commented Nov 13, 2020

RogerRiggs Nov 17, 2020

RogerRiggs Nov 17, 2020

RogerRiggs Nov 17, 2020

stuart-marks Nov 17, 2020

RogerRiggs Nov 17, 2020

RogerRiggs Nov 17, 2020

RogerRiggs Nov 18, 2020

igraves Nov 18, 2020

openjdk bot commented Nov 18, 2020 •

edited

stuart-marks Nov 19, 2020

igraves Nov 19, 2020

igraves commented Nov 19, 2020

openjdk bot commented Nov 19, 2020

stuart-marks commented Nov 19, 2020

openjdk bot commented Nov 19, 2020

8253459: Formatter treats index, width and precision > Integer.MAX_VALUE incorrectly #516

8253459: Formatter treats index, width and precision > Integer.MAX_VALUE incorrectly #516

Conversation

igraves commented Oct 5, 2020 • edited by openjdk bot

Progress

Testing

Issue

Reviewers

Download

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 5, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 5, 2020

igraves commented Oct 5, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 5, 2020

mlbridge bot commented Oct 5, 2020 • edited

Webrevs

RogerRiggs left a comment • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

igraves commented Oct 6, 2020

mlbridge bot commented Oct 15, 2020

Marcono1234 left a comment • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 • edited by bridgekeeper bot

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openjdk bot commented Nov 13, 2020

igraves commented Nov 13, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openjdk bot commented Nov 18, 2020 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

igraves commented Nov 19, 2020

openjdk bot commented Nov 19, 2020

stuart-marks commented Nov 19, 2020

openjdk bot commented Nov 19, 2020

igraves commented Oct 5, 2020 •

edited by openjdk bot

mlbridge bot commented Oct 5, 2020 •

edited

RogerRiggs left a comment •

edited

Marcono1234 left a comment •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Marcono1234 Oct 24, 2020 •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

openjdk bot commented Nov 18, 2020 •

edited