Partition.java does not check the validity of input iterators#236
Open
emopers wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Partition.java does not check the validity of input iterators#236emopers wants to merge 1 commit into
emopers wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Fixing hasNext violation in a public class.
Member
|
Looks good to me! What do you think, @tpietzsch? |
Member
|
I retract my LGTM; see #259 (comment). |
Member
|
In #259 (comment), @tpietzsch wrote:
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Partition.javacallsj.previous()onjava.util.Iterator jandi.next()onjava.util.Iterator iwithout checking if there are any elements to iterate over. Because the method is public and the iterators are obtained from inputs, they could be invalid (e.g., an empty list) and lead to an exception. This pull request adds a
hasNext()and ahasPrevious()check.This violation is present in other parts of this class as well. If this fix is acceptable to you, we can
submit another pull request with fixes for all other cases.