I see. I will recreate the jira. On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/Jul/2009 10:27, Charles Lee wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Regis <xu.re...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Charles Lee wrote: > >> > >>> It's a complicate situation. For example, user can override the read(), > >>> which eats the exception thrown there. And this will make read(byte[], > >>> int, > >>> int) pass successful. Since PipedInputStream and PipedOutputStream are > >>> > >> He can override read(byte[], int, int) either. I'd like think it's a > >> non-bug difference, and more, Harmony's implementation is better: > reading > >> batch data once is better than reading one by one byte. > >> > > I agree it's better to read data once. With the result of the test case, > RI > > seems to read one byte first to check the situation, and then read batch > > data. > > By the way, does harmony has a list about non-bug difference? > > Yes, create a JIRA and assign it to the component "Non-bug differences > from RI" > > Regards, > Tim > > -- Yours sincerely, Charles Lee
