[erlang-patches] [jinterface] added OtpMbox.hash()

[Björn Gustavsson]

2010/9/20 Vlad Dumitrescu <vladdu55@REDACTED>:
> 2010/9/20 Björn Gustavsson <bgustavsson@REDACTED>:
>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Vlad Dumitrescu <vladdu55@REDACTED> wrote:
>>> The OtpMbox class was missing the hash() method while overriding
>>> equals(). This can cause problems when when using jinterface in a
>>> larger Java application, for which there are currently no tests in
>>> OTP.
>>
>> The motivation given above is much more useful
>> if it is included in the commit message. See:
>
> Fixed. sorry about that.

Thanks! Now included in 'pu'.

>
>>> The fix is straightforward, if a test is required please let me
>>> know.
>>
>> The reviewer will have to decide whether a test case is
>> needed or not. Including a test with a bug fix will certainly
>> increase the probability that we will include it.
>
> Yes, I know, but in this case one has to start a Java application from
> the OTP test suite, and handle that as a normal test case. I'm not
> sure how the setup would have to be configured so that it works -- for
> just this fix it's overkill, but if you think that testing jinterface
> from the Java side is something that you will want to do, then it is
> worth spending some effort on that. I am happily available to discuss
> details. Maybe this can be handled outside the Erlang suite, with a
> separate Java suite (the question is then if it's required to merge
> the results into a single report).

Yes, I agree that it might be overkill in this case, but I will
let the reviewer decide. We sometimes do include bug fixes
without a test case. It all depends on the difficulty in writing a
test case, the seriousness of the bug and the probability of
the bug fix being correct and not likely to easily stop working
in the future.

-- 
Björn Gustavsson, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB