> Can I please get a review of this doc and test-only change for 
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8322256?
> 
> The `java.util.zip.GZIPInputStream` has been in the JDK since Java 1.1. 
> However, its specification hasn't been clear on how it behaves, especially 
> when a `InputStream` consists of more than one GZIP member. 
> 
> The commit in this PR updates the specification of this class to match its 
> current (long standing) implementation.
> 
> A new jtreg test has been introduced to verify this behaviour.
> 
> I'll draft a CSR shortly.
> 
> ---------
> - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the [OpenJDK 
> Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai).

Jaikiran Pai has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge 
or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in 
by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 14 additional commits since the 
last revision:

 - Lance's review
 - merge latest from master branch
 - introduce test to verify read() throws IOException when invoked on closed 
stream
 - specify existing behaviour of throwing IOException when stream is already 
closed
 - merge latest from master branch
 - specify that GZIPInputStream is not thread-safe
 - refer to section 2.2 of the RFC
 - remove additional sentence from constructor documentation
 - Lance's review - clarify implicit vs explicit close()
 - merge latest from master branch
 - ... and 4 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/8797c6c2...f3b4d725

-------------

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30925/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30925/files/39ba6bc7..f3b4d725

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=30925&range=07
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=30925&range=06-07

  Stats: 10387 lines in 222 files changed: 8716 ins; 769 del; 902 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30925.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/30925/head:pull/30925

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30925

Reply via email to