This is still in need of final approval, assuming it is OK.
Thanks,
Brian
On Mar 14, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Brian Burkhalter <brian.burkhal...@oracle.com>
wrote:
> On Mar 14, 2018, at 9:27 AM, David Lloyd <david.ll...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> @@ -196,14 +194,32 @@
>> return len;
>> }
>>
>> + public synchronized byte[] readAllBytes() {
>> + byte[] result = Arrays.copyOfRange(buf, pos, count);
>> + pos = count;
>> + return result;
>> + }
>> +
>> + public synchronized int readNBytes(byte[] b, int off, int len) {
>> + int n = read(b, off, len);
>> + return n == -1 ? 0 : n;
>> + }
>>
>> This probably doesn't need to be synchronized, though I imagine the
>> difference would be minimal.
>
> You are correct, it does not.
>
>> + public synchronized long transferTo(OutputStream out) throws
>> IOException {
>> + int len = count - pos
>> + out.write(but, pos, len);
>>
>> s/but/buf/ I guess?
>
> Webrevs corrected in place:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8180451/webrev.00-01/
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8180451/webrev.01/
