Hi Pavel,
Good catch, the javadoc needs to match the code and in this case the new
language
does not match the code. Some cases are harder to follow because they
delegate
to other classes for copying.
It may also be the case that since Writer.write(char[], off, len) is
abstract, it cannot enforce the contract
consistently on all subclasses and something special will be needed for
that javadoc.
Roger
On 5/10/2016 10:32 AM, Pavel Rappo wrote:
Hold it right there :-)
There's an open issue about BufferedWriter
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8029804
So in this case what we've added in the @throws for
java.io.BufferedWriter#write(java.lang.String, int, int) directly contradicts
what it states two paragraphs above, doesn't it?
* <p> If the value of the {@code len} parameter is negative then no
* characters are written. This is contrary to the specification of this
* method in the {@linkplain java.io.Writer#write(java.lang.String,int,int)
* superclass}, which requires that an {@link IndexOutOfBoundsException} be
* thrown.
That doesn't look good.
On 10 May 2016, at 14:48, Roger Riggs <roger.ri...@oracle.com> wrote:
Looks good Brian,
Thanks
On 5/10/2016 5:36 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 10 May 2016, at 00:29, Brian Burkhalter <brian.burkhal...@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Roger,
So modified:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8130679/webrev.01/
This looks good to me.
I have to admit that I reviewed the current wording in Reader.read, but on
reflection it would be better to update it to reflect this wording. But that is
a
separate, lower priority, issue.
-Chris.
Thanks,
Brian
On May 9, 2016, at 2:56 PM, Roger Riggs <roger.ri...@oracle.com> wrote:
Yes, I think that works well.
On 5/9/16 5:15 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
So do you think that this form for example:
(common prefix)
* @throws IndexOutOfBoundsException
* If {@code off} is negative, or {@code len} is negative,
* or {@code off + len} is negative or greater than the length
