-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix cljam.io.bam-test to work properly #266
Conversation
d477a60
to
731ccd5
Compare
By referring to the log below, you can see that the current test fails on Java 19. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As I commented before, (= ?value ?value)
doesn't check anything.
Fix the assertion first, then update the test cases. The linter warnings will be also resolved.
Uh, I see. |
.github/workflows/main.yml
Outdated
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ jobs: | |||
runs-on: ubuntu-18.04 | |||
strategy: | |||
matrix: | |||
java: [ '8', '11', '16', '17-ea'] | |||
java: [ '8', '11', '16', '17-ea', '19'] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LTS versions and the latest
java: [ '8', '11', '16', '17-ea', '19'] | |
java: [ '8', '11', '17', '19'] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM 👍
I just changed the setting of reviewers assignment from load balancing to round robin and redrew a reviewer. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM.
Sorry for the late review.
This PR resolves two issues included in the current
cljam.io.bam-test
.First problem:
Current
cljam.io.bam-test
fails when run with JDK 19. This PR will fixcljam.io.bam-test
to work regardless of JDK version.Accordiing to this release note related to JDK 19, the result of
Float.toString(float)
evaluation may change from previous releases. The value of1.17549435E-38
, which is used in current test, is affected by this and It causes test failures. This PR resolves the problem by avoiding the use of1.17549435E-38
.Second problem:
In the following code, there is a
?value
at the end of theas->
macro, thus effectively evaluating(= ?value ?value)
. Perhaps a previous typo, which I have removed.cljam/test/cljam/io/bam_test.clj
Lines 10 to 15 in 843e30b
Same as above.
cljam/test/cljam/io/bam_test.clj
Lines 53 to 58 in 843e30b