Let's see what the OP replies with in the ticket... otherwise it's just busy work with no customer.
Gary On Fri, Oct 23, 2026, 09:26 Adarsh Kumaromrey <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Gary, > > Thank you for the quick response, the Javadoc clarification and the > XML whitespace workaround. The STRICT contract is much clearer now. > > Since you mentioned that a PR to improve the API would be welcome, I > would like to check one idea with you before writing any code: > > An opt-in Base64.Builder option so that STRICT decoding ignores line > separators and whitespace, while still validating the alphabet, > padding and trailing bits. The default would stay exactly as in > 1.23.x, so there would be no behavior change for existing callers. > > The goal is to avoid callers having to pre-process input themselves > when they receive wrapped Base64 but still want trailing-bit > validation. > > I have three questions: > 1. Would an option like this be welcome at all, or would you prefer to > keep the API surface as it is? > 2. If yes, do you have a preferred shape or name for it? > 3. Should it cover only Base64, or Base32 as well? > > If you agree, I will send a PR with tests and Javadoc. If not, I am > happy to drop the idea. > > Thanks, > Adarsh > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
