On Wed, 11 Aug 2021 11:27:53 GMT, Alan Bateman <al...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> I've looked through the latest revision. Is there any way that we could drop > most of the changes to ChannelInputStream and focus on one or two specific > cases? I'm asking because there are several issues, inconsistencies, and it > is trying to cover many scenarios that aren't covered by the test. > If the original motivation was file -> file then it could be simplified down > to a FileChannel -> FileChannel transfer as the default provider uses file > channels. We could even push some support into FileChannelImpl so that it is > done while holding the position lock. I am a bit disappointed actually about that destructive answer at that late point in time, now that I worked for months on all the requested changes and tests. To prevent exactly this situation, I deliberately had the discussion started in JIRA only, and I deliberately had the original code being just a draft in the first place, and I deliberately did nearly *everything* I was asked to (including even the most irrelevant minor code style issues). And you come up with the request to drop the code **now**? Certainly we could reduce the PR to just file channels, but in fact, now that I spent all the time in the non-file-channels, I wonder why I shall throw away all that work and go just with file channels actually? What is not covered that was originally covered, and what is that lots of issues you talk about? Actually I cannot see the actual problem unless you name it. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4263
