[LANG-1040] Javadoc for NumberUtils.isNumber() are not clear enough

• Type: Bug
• Status: Closed
• Priority: Major
• Resolution: Fixed
• Affects Version/s: 3.3.2
• Fix Version/s: 3.5
• Component/s: lang.math.*
• Assignee: Rob Tompkins
• Reporter: Duncan Jones
• Created: 24/Sep/14 14:01
• Updated: 19/Oct/16 07:00
• Resolved: 11/Sep/16 20:38

Description

The Javadocs for NumberUtils.isNumber() do not clearly define what a valid number is. The current trunk documentation states:

Checks whether the String a valid Java number.

Valid numbers include hexadecimal marked with the 0x or 0X qualifier, octal numbers, scientific notation and numbers marked with a type qualifier (e.g. 123L).

Non-hexadecimal strings beginning with a leading zero are treated as octal values. Thus the string 09 will return false, since 9 is not a valid octal value. However, numbers beginning with 0. are treated as decimal.

Null and empty String will return false.

In other Jira issues, I've seen people suggest that a number if valid if it can be used when assigning to a suitable Java type. E.g. "FOO" is a valid number if long x = FOO is valid (where long might be another numeric type). If this is the case, we should state it.

Alternatively, the definition could be in terms of what is accepted by createNumber().

Or we define exactly what we accept by specifying a grammar in the Javadocs.

Issue Links

• blocks: LANG-1038 NumberUtils#isNumber() returns false for "+2" and true for "-2"
• is related to: LANG-992 NumberUtils#isNumber() returns false for "0.0", "0.4790", et al
• is related to: LANG-1252 NumberUtils.isNumber and NumberUtils.createNumber resolve inconsistently
• relates to: LANG-1252 NumberUtils.isNumber and NumberUtils.createNumber resolve inconsistently