(4) The logic in "non-direct" and "non-array backed" case is incorrect,
both deflater and inflater.
...
} else {
final byte[] tmparray = new byte[rem];
bbuffer.get(tmparray);
result = deflate(tmparray, pos, rem, flush);
}
The bbuffer here is not a "input" buffer but an output buffer to hold
the compressed/uncompressed
output data. So the implementation should be (1) create a temporary
array with the size of rem
(2) pass the temporary array into deflate/inflate (3) copy the "result"
number of byte from the temporary
array into bbuffer (4) return "result"
-Sherman
On 4/14/2012 11:29 AM, Xueming Shen wrote:
Hi Martin,
Thanks for taking on this one. Here are my comments after first scan
(1) Upon return, the position of the ByteBuffer should not always be
updated to the "limit". It should depend
on the number of bytes really compressed/de-compressed. Like the
buffer at ReadableByteChannel.read(buffer).
(2) The implementation of the native buffer version and non-buffer
version probably can share most of their
code in a separated method
(3) The input part will be tough. I was struggling with if we should
have a totally separated subclass, like
DeflaterBuffer/InfalterBuffer (or BufferDefalter/Inflater) to only
handle everything in ByteBuffer with
methods handles buffer input and output, throw "not supported
operation" for those "byte[]" methods.
Otherwise you will have to put something in the specification to
mandate the behavior of mixed bytebuff
and byte[] scenario. I'm not sure which way is more appropriate though.
-Sherman
On 4/14/2012 1:28 AM, Martin Kirst wrote:
Hi,
I'm interested in contribute some work to openJdk.
I found the Sun BUG:
6341887 "Inflater.setInput(), Inflater.inflate() can't handle
ByteBuffer".
After digging a little in the mailing archives I found nothing.
I've coded the first step towards ByteBuffer support.
The webrev below supports ByteBuffer for Inflater's and Deflater's
output methods.
Depending on your comments I would like to go the last step
later on. I've in mind, to implement ByteBuffer support for
input methods also, using the same approach like ByteBuffer uses.
When using direct ByteBuffer for input, you must also use it
for output. Same as ByteBuffer#hasArray(). So developers have
to use byte arrays or ByteBuffers, but not mixing them.
WebRev here:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/52514330/6341887/webrev.00/index.html
Feedback is welcome.
Regards
Martin
