Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account | 12-17-2024 11:36 PST |
Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Docs |
Viewing Issue Advanced Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ View Simple ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||||
ID | Category | Severity | Reproducibility | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||||
0001305 | [Resin] | minor | always | 08-21-06 11:21 | 08-21-06 13:14 | ||||
Reporter | ferg | View Status | public | ||||||
Assigned To | ferg | ||||||||
Priority | normal | Resolution | fixed | Platform | |||||
Status | closed | OS | |||||||
Projection | none | OS Version | |||||||
ETA | none | Fixed in Version | 3.0.22 | Product Version | 3.0.21 | ||||
Product Build | |||||||||
Summary | 0001305: Hessian and construstor with many arguments | ||||||||
Description |
(rep by Rick Mann) In JavaDeserializer.JavaDeserializer(Class cl): When computing the cost of a constructor, int types are used. One of our constructors has 13 parameters, resulting in an overflow error. That is, the resulting value exceeds the signed MAX_INT, so the result becomes negative (Java really needs unsigned types), and thus more complex constructors get a lower computed cost. I changed the type of cost and bestCost to be long, and that accommodated our constructor, but this approach doesn't scale. Perhaps BigDecimal is better? Or, choose the no-arg constructor directly when found, or don't compute full cost until comparing two constructors with the same number of arguments...many possibilities. |
||||||||
Steps To Reproduce | |||||||||
Additional Information | |||||||||
Attached Files | |||||||||
|
Mantis 1.0.0rc3[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2005 Mantis Group
28 total queries executed. 25 unique queries executed. |