Re: More finalize woes

[Dalibor Topic]

--- Tom Tromey <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>>>> "Dalibor" == Dalibor Topic <address@hidden>
> writes:
> 
> Dalibor> Your generator ends up with a different set
> of test cases for
> Dalibor> Classpath and for JDK. This may not be what
> you want but it's
> Dalibor> what you get when methods are left out ;)
> 
> This is an interesting example.  I'm not so sure
> that what you end up
> with is incorrect in a significant way, though.  Or
> perhaps you'd
> prefer to write your test generator to look at all
> the methods,
> inherited or declared, in a given class.

I'd prefer to run an 'inheritance chain' of tests, so
a CharArrayReader should pass its own black box tests,
and the tests for Reader as well, for example.

> Dalibor> beside, the 'least surprise' argument
> applies here as
> Dalibor> well. If I extend Classpath's Deflater to
> implement my own
> Dalibor> SuperfastNativeDeflater, then I'd like to
> rely on finalize()
> Dalibor> calling end(), as the spec says.
> 
> In cases where there is a finalizer with a
> documented effect, I agree
> we must implement it.  I'm just talking about
> trivial finalizers -- I
> think we don't need those.

I'm wondering if there are any trivial finalizers in
the spec, or just 'underdocumented' ones ;)

cheers,
dalibor topic

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/