On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:08 AM, Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The method JarFile#getInputStream(ZipEntry) is spec'd to return an > InputStream, not a ZipInputStream. > > Furthermore, as I showed, the RI returns a stream that answers with > available() > 1, i.e. it follows the InputStream spec. > Yup. And if we want to do likewise, we should change he *runtime* type of the returned stream so that it isn't a subtype of ZipInputStream. > We should follow the spec and RI behavior. While we have only got > examples of our own code making the assumption on available() [1] I > expect that there will be third-party applications making the same > assumptions. > You're right. Sadly this bogus pattern is quite common. http://www.google.com/codesearch?hl=en&start=10&sa=N&q=new \+byte\[\w%2B\.available\(\)\]+file:\.java
