Re: [classlib] [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-410) method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer
Hi Andrew, Thanks for your answer, please see my comments inside. On 5/22/06, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Mikhail and Vladimir, I'd rather consider it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. Yes, we can close the issue as wontfix with compatibility comments, but I think we should put some description to Wiki. Or possible you can suggest more appropriate place for this. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Partly right. Vladimir, maybe as you know, deep studying on decode will show many RI's unreasonable behaviours. Since RI's behaviour is not logical and the spec description is very vague in some situations (e.g. decode state defination, in/out buffer poistion defination), I can't say that RI's behaviour is not logical, but I can agree that decoding process implemented in Harmony is more convenient for developers (you don't need to get undecoded part from buffer and put it to the next decoding operation). we finally decided not to follow RI's behaviour. IMO, current Harmony implementation complies with spec strictly, acts in logical way and also doesn't affect end-users. So I'd rather consider it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. Corresponding to my previous comment, I can't agree that Harmony strictly comply with the spec, it's just our understanding of the spec. That's why I'd like to document this behaviour. Thanks. Vladimir. What's your opnion? Thanks. On 5/15/06, Vladimir Strigun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2006/5/5, Vladimir Strigun [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vladimir, Andrew 2006/4/26, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Here I propose two solutions: 1. Set the ByteBuffer to the limit, and store the remaining ByteBuffer in decoder. Invokers doesn't care the position of in. If the result is UNDERFLOW and there're furthur input, just pass the new input to the decoder. It's a typical streaming decoder. That's what Harmony does currently. 2. Decoder doesn't store remaining ByteBuffer. Position of in is set to indicate the remaining ByteBuffer. Invoker should take care to generate new input ByteBuffer for next invocation. RI acts in this way. Both are acceptable. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Mikhail, you absolutely right. I think this issue could be closed, but possibly it would be better to mark it as non-bug difference from RI. Richard, what do you think? In this case according to our compatibility guidelines we should switch behavior to RI-like. Andrew, what do you think about it? I think we should mark it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. If we will switch to RI behaviour, we need to check all decoding operations in java.io package and possibly correct some methods. Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail However, I think solution 1 is more reasonable. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Yes. In fact, your patch will make Harmony act as the description above. However, I don't think it solve the problem. Maybe invoker is more confusable and may think: Is the remaining bytebuffer maintained in decoder or in ? Shall I get the remaining buffer from in and pass it for next invocation? Anyway, we need a decision on this compatibility issue. By the way, Vladimir, does solution one cause any problem on other classlib implementation? Any comment? Thanks ! Vladimir Strigun commented on HARMONY-410: -- Hi Richard, Thanks for the clarification, I agree that streaming decode is good thing, but I'd like to explain my understanding of specification :) According to specification of CharsetDecoder decoding operation should process by the following steps: 2. Invoke the decode method zero or more times, as long as additional input may be available, passing false for the endOfInput argument and filling the input buffer and flushing the output buffer between invocations; 3. Invoke the decode method one final time, passing true for the endOfInput argument; and then spec also says: The buffers' positions will be advanced to reflect the bytes read and the characters written, but their marks and limits will not be modified I understand these sentences in the next way: invoke decode with endOfInput = false if you have
Re: [classlib] [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-410) method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer
Currently Mikhail marked this issue as won't fix with comments of non-bug difference from RI. I remember there is a similar category in JIRA(I just cannot recall the exact name, but it should be obvious), is there any chance in JIRA system to change this issue's category to that one? I think it will be easier to search later. If not, how about raise another one in that non-bug difference from RI category and add a link to 410? Vladimir Strigun wrote: Hi Andrew, Thanks for your answer, please see my comments inside. On 5/22/06, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Mikhail and Vladimir, I'd rather consider it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. Yes, we can close the issue as wontfix with compatibility comments, but I think we should put some description to Wiki. Or possible you can suggest more appropriate place for this. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Partly right. Vladimir, maybe as you know, deep studying on decode will show many RI's unreasonable behaviours. Since RI's behaviour is not logical and the spec description is very vague in some situations (e.g. decode state defination, in/out buffer poistion defination), I can't say that RI's behaviour is not logical, but I can agree that decoding process implemented in Harmony is more convenient for developers (you don't need to get undecoded part from buffer and put it to the next decoding operation). we finally decided not to follow RI's behaviour. IMO, current Harmony implementation complies with spec strictly, acts in logical way and also doesn't affect end-users. So I'd rather consider it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. Corresponding to my previous comment, I can't agree that Harmony strictly comply with the spec, it's just our understanding of the spec. That's why I'd like to document this behaviour. Thanks. Vladimir. What's your opnion? Thanks. On 5/15/06, Vladimir Strigun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2006/5/5, Vladimir Strigun [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vladimir, Andrew 2006/4/26, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Here I propose two solutions: 1. Set the ByteBuffer to the limit, and store the remaining ByteBuffer in decoder. Invokers doesn't care the position of in. If the result is UNDERFLOW and there're furthur input, just pass the new input to the decoder. It's a typical streaming decoder. That's what Harmony does currently. 2. Decoder doesn't store remaining ByteBuffer. Position of in is set to indicate the remaining ByteBuffer. Invoker should take care to generate new input ByteBuffer for next invocation. RI acts in this way. Both are acceptable. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Mikhail, you absolutely right. I think this issue could be closed, but possibly it would be better to mark it as non-bug difference from RI. Richard, what do you think? In this case according to our compatibility guidelines we should switch behavior to RI-like. Andrew, what do you think about it? I think we should mark it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. If we will switch to RI behaviour, we need to check all decoding operations in java.io package and possibly correct some methods. Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail However, I think solution 1 is more reasonable. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Yes. In fact, your patch will make Harmony act as the description above. However, I don't think it solve the problem. Maybe invoker is more confusable and may think: Is the remaining bytebuffer maintained in decoder or in ? Shall I get the remaining buffer from in and pass it for next invocation? Anyway, we need a decision on this compatibility issue. By the way, Vladimir, does solution one cause any problem on other classlib implementation? Any comment? Thanks ! Vladimir Strigun commented on HARMONY-410: -- Hi Richard, Thanks for the clarification, I agree that streaming decode is good thing, but I'd like to explain my understanding of specification :) According to specification of CharsetDecoder decoding operation should process by the following steps: 2. Invoke the decode method zero or more times, as long as additional input may be available, passing false for the endOfInput
Re: [classlib] [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-410) method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer
Hi Paulex I've changed JIRA category to non-bug differences from RI just before I closed the bug Thanks, Mikhail 2006/5/23, Paulex Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Currently Mikhail marked this issue as won't fix with comments of non-bug difference from RI. I remember there is a similar category in JIRA(I just cannot recall the exact name, but it should be obvious), is there any chance in JIRA system to change this issue's category to that one? I think it will be easier to search later. If not, how about raise another one in that non-bug difference from RI category and add a link to 410? Vladimir Strigun wrote: Hi Andrew, Thanks for your answer, please see my comments inside. On 5/22/06, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Mikhail and Vladimir, I'd rather consider it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. Yes, we can close the issue as wontfix with compatibility comments, but I think we should put some description to Wiki. Or possible you can suggest more appropriate place for this. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Partly right. Vladimir, maybe as you know, deep studying on decode will show many RI's unreasonable behaviours. Since RI's behaviour is not logical and the spec description is very vague in some situations (e.g. decode state defination, in/out buffer poistion defination), I can't say that RI's behaviour is not logical, but I can agree that decoding process implemented in Harmony is more convenient for developers (you don't need to get undecoded part from buffer and put it to the next decoding operation). we finally decided not to follow RI's behaviour. IMO, current Harmony implementation complies with spec strictly, acts in logical way and also doesn't affect end-users. So I'd rather consider it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. Corresponding to my previous comment, I can't agree that Harmony strictly comply with the spec, it's just our understanding of the spec. That's why I'd like to document this behaviour. Thanks. Vladimir. What's your opnion? Thanks. On 5/15/06, Vladimir Strigun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2006/5/5, Vladimir Strigun [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vladimir, Andrew 2006/4/26, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Here I propose two solutions: 1. Set the ByteBuffer to the limit, and store the remaining ByteBuffer in decoder. Invokers doesn't care the position of in. If the result is UNDERFLOW and there're furthur input, just pass the new input to the decoder. It's a typical streaming decoder. That's what Harmony does currently. 2. Decoder doesn't store remaining ByteBuffer. Position of in is set to indicate the remaining ByteBuffer. Invoker should take care to generate new input ByteBuffer for next invocation. RI acts in this way. Both are acceptable. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Mikhail, you absolutely right. I think this issue could be closed, but possibly it would be better to mark it as non-bug difference from RI. Richard, what do you think? In this case according to our compatibility guidelines we should switch behavior to RI-like. Andrew, what do you think about it? I think we should mark it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. If we will switch to RI behaviour, we need to check all decoding operations in java.io package and possibly correct some methods. Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail However, I think solution 1 is more reasonable. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Yes. In fact, your patch will make Harmony act as the description above. However, I don't think it solve the problem. Maybe invoker is more confusable and may think: Is the remaining bytebuffer maintained in decoder or in ? Shall I get the remaining buffer from in and pass it for next invocation? Anyway, we need a decision on this compatibility issue. By the way, Vladimir, does solution one cause any problem on other classlib implementation? Any comment? Thanks ! Vladimir Strigun commented on HARMONY-410: -- Hi Richard, Thanks for the clarification, I agree that streaming decode is good thing, but I'd like to explain my understanding of specification :)
Re: [classlib] [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-410) method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer
Ah, I only checked the bug type just now, I just noticed that the non-bug differences from RI is not type but component. Sorry and thanks:). Mikhail Loenko wrote: Hi Paulex I've changed JIRA category to non-bug differences from RI just before I closed the bug Thanks, Mikhail 2006/5/23, Paulex Yang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Currently Mikhail marked this issue as won't fix with comments of non-bug difference from RI. I remember there is a similar category in JIRA(I just cannot recall the exact name, but it should be obvious), is there any chance in JIRA system to change this issue's category to that one? I think it will be easier to search later. If not, how about raise another one in that non-bug difference from RI category and add a link to 410? Vladimir Strigun wrote: Hi Andrew, Thanks for your answer, please see my comments inside. On 5/22/06, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Mikhail and Vladimir, I'd rather consider it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. Yes, we can close the issue as wontfix with compatibility comments, but I think we should put some description to Wiki. Or possible you can suggest more appropriate place for this. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Partly right. Vladimir, maybe as you know, deep studying on decode will show many RI's unreasonable behaviours. Since RI's behaviour is not logical and the spec description is very vague in some situations (e.g. decode state defination, in/out buffer poistion defination), I can't say that RI's behaviour is not logical, but I can agree that decoding process implemented in Harmony is more convenient for developers (you don't need to get undecoded part from buffer and put it to the next decoding operation). we finally decided not to follow RI's behaviour. IMO, current Harmony implementation complies with spec strictly, acts in logical way and also doesn't affect end-users. So I'd rather consider it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. Corresponding to my previous comment, I can't agree that Harmony strictly comply with the spec, it's just our understanding of the spec. That's why I'd like to document this behaviour. Thanks. Vladimir. What's your opnion? Thanks. On 5/15/06, Vladimir Strigun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2006/5/5, Vladimir Strigun [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vladimir, Andrew 2006/4/26, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Here I propose two solutions: 1. Set the ByteBuffer to the limit, and store the remaining ByteBuffer in decoder. Invokers doesn't care the position of in. If the result is UNDERFLOW and there're furthur input, just pass the new input to the decoder. It's a typical streaming decoder. That's what Harmony does currently. 2. Decoder doesn't store remaining ByteBuffer. Position of in is set to indicate the remaining ByteBuffer. Invoker should take care to generate new input ByteBuffer for next invocation. RI acts in this way. Both are acceptable. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Mikhail, you absolutely right. I think this issue could be closed, but possibly it would be better to mark it as non-bug difference from RI. Richard, what do you think? In this case according to our compatibility guidelines we should switch behavior to RI-like. Andrew, what do you think about it? I think we should mark it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. If we will switch to RI behaviour, we need to check all decoding operations in java.io package and possibly correct some methods. Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail However, I think solution 1 is more reasonable. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Yes. In fact, your patch will make Harmony act as the description above. However, I don't think it solve the problem. Maybe invoker is more confusable and may think: Is the remaining bytebuffer maintained in decoder or in ? Shall I get the remaining buffer from in and pass it for next invocation? Anyway, we need a decision on this compatibility issue. By the way, Vladimir, does solution one cause any problem on other classlib implementation? Any comment? Thanks ! Vladimir Strigun commented on HARMONY-410: --
Re: [classlib] [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-410) method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer
On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2006/5/5, Vladimir Strigun [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vladimir, Andrew 2006/4/26, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Here I propose two solutions: 1. Set the ByteBuffer to the limit, and store the remaining ByteBuffer in decoder. Invokers doesn't care the position of in. If the result is UNDERFLOW and there're furthur input, just pass the new input to the decoder. It's a typical streaming decoder. That's what Harmony does currently. 2. Decoder doesn't store remaining ByteBuffer. Position of in is set to indicate the remaining ByteBuffer. Invoker should take care to generate new input ByteBuffer for next invocation. RI acts in this way. Both are acceptable. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Mikhail, you absolutely right. I think this issue could be closed, but possibly it would be better to mark it as non-bug difference from RI. Richard, what do you think? In this case according to our compatibility guidelines we should switch behavior to RI-like. Andrew, what do you think about it? I think we should mark it as compatibility bug and close it as wontfix. If we will switch to RI behaviour, we need to check all decoding operations in java.io package and possibly correct some methods. Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail However, I think solution 1 is more reasonable. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Yes. In fact, your patch will make Harmony act as the description above. However, I don't think it solve the problem. Maybe invoker is more confusable and may think: Is the remaining bytebuffer maintained in decoder or in ? Shall I get the remaining buffer from in and pass it for next invocation? Anyway, we need a decision on this compatibility issue. By the way, Vladimir, does solution one cause any problem on other classlib implementation? Any comment? Thanks ! Vladimir Strigun commented on HARMONY-410: -- Hi Richard, Thanks for the clarification, I agree that streaming decode is good thing, but I'd like to explain my understanding of specification :) According to specification of CharsetDecoder decoding operation should process by the following steps: 2. Invoke the decode method zero or more times, as long as additional input may be available, passing false for the endOfInput argument and filling the input buffer and flushing the output buffer between invocations; 3. Invoke the decode method one final time, passing true for the endOfInput argument; and then spec also says: The buffers' positions will be advanced to reflect the bytes read and the characters written, but their marks and limits will not be modified I understand these sentences in the next way: invoke decode with endOfInput = false if you have additional input, then fill the buffer (i.e. add to buffer some additional input), invoke decode again and pass correct endOfInput parameter dependent of availability of input. Example you provided is very useful and, of course, 1st option looks better, but what I'm suggest here is to reflect actual processed bytes in input. After first invocation of decode, not all bytes processed actually, i.e. almost all bytes processed, but some stored in decoder to further operation. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Thanks. Vladimir. method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer Key: HARMONY-410 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-410 Project: Harmony Type: Bug Components: Classlib Reporter: Vladimir Strigun Assignee: Mikhail Loenko Priority: Minor Attachments: Harmony-410_patch.txt, harmony-410_test.txt When ByteBuffer contain incomplete sequence of bytes for successful decoding, position in ByteBuffer should be set to latest successful byte. I will attach testcase and patch soon. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira -- Andrew Zhang China
Re: [classlib] [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-410) method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer
On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vladimir, Andrew 2006/4/26, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Here I propose two solutions: 1. Set the ByteBuffer to the limit, and store the remaining ByteBuffer in decoder. Invokers doesn't care the position of in. If the result is UNDERFLOW and there're furthur input, just pass the new input to the decoder. It's a typical streaming decoder. That's what Harmony does currently. 2. Decoder doesn't store remaining ByteBuffer. Position of in is set to indicate the remaining ByteBuffer. Invoker should take care to generate new input ByteBuffer for next invocation. RI acts in this way. Both are acceptable. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Mikhail, you absolutely right. I think this issue could be closed, but possibly it would be better to mark it as non-bug difference from RI. Richard, what do you think? Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail However, I think solution 1 is more reasonable. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Yes. In fact, your patch will make Harmony act as the description above. However, I don't think it solve the problem. Maybe invoker is more confusable and may think: Is the remaining bytebuffer maintained in decoder or in ? Shall I get the remaining buffer from in and pass it for next invocation? Anyway, we need a decision on this compatibility issue. By the way, Vladimir, does solution one cause any problem on other classlib implementation? Any comment? Thanks ! Vladimir Strigun commented on HARMONY-410: -- Hi Richard, Thanks for the clarification, I agree that streaming decode is good thing, but I'd like to explain my understanding of specification :) According to specification of CharsetDecoder decoding operation should process by the following steps: 2. Invoke the decode method zero or more times, as long as additional input may be available, passing false for the endOfInput argument and filling the input buffer and flushing the output buffer between invocations; 3. Invoke the decode method one final time, passing true for the endOfInput argument; and then spec also says: The buffers' positions will be advanced to reflect the bytes read and the characters written, but their marks and limits will not be modified I understand these sentences in the next way: invoke decode with endOfInput = false if you have additional input, then fill the buffer (i.e. add to buffer some additional input), invoke decode again and pass correct endOfInput parameter dependent of availability of input. Example you provided is very useful and, of course, 1st option looks better, but what I'm suggest here is to reflect actual processed bytes in input. After first invocation of decode, not all bytes processed actually, i.e. almost all bytes processed, but some stored in decoder to further operation. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Thanks. Vladimir. method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer Key: HARMONY-410 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-410 Project: Harmony Type: Bug Components: Classlib Reporter: Vladimir Strigun Assignee: Mikhail Loenko Priority: Minor Attachments: Harmony-410_patch.txt, harmony-410_test.txt When ByteBuffer contain incomplete sequence of bytes for successful decoding, position in ByteBuffer should be set to latest successful byte. I will attach testcase and patch soon. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira -- Andrew Zhang China Software Development Lab, IBM - Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [classlib] [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-410) method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer
2006/5/5, Vladimir Strigun [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 5/5/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vladimir, Andrew 2006/4/26, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Here I propose two solutions: 1. Set the ByteBuffer to the limit, and store the remaining ByteBuffer in decoder. Invokers doesn't care the position of in. If the result is UNDERFLOW and there're furthur input, just pass the new input to the decoder. It's a typical streaming decoder. That's what Harmony does currently. 2. Decoder doesn't store remaining ByteBuffer. Position of in is set to indicate the remaining ByteBuffer. Invoker should take care to generate new input ByteBuffer for next invocation. RI acts in this way. Both are acceptable. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Mikhail, you absolutely right. I think this issue could be closed, but possibly it would be better to mark it as non-bug difference from RI. Richard, what do you think? In this case according to our compatibility guidelines we should switch behavior to RI-like. Thanks, Mikhail Thanks. Vladimir. Thanks, Mikhail However, I think solution 1 is more reasonable. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Yes. In fact, your patch will make Harmony act as the description above. However, I don't think it solve the problem. Maybe invoker is more confusable and may think: Is the remaining bytebuffer maintained in decoder or in ? Shall I get the remaining buffer from in and pass it for next invocation? Anyway, we need a decision on this compatibility issue. By the way, Vladimir, does solution one cause any problem on other classlib implementation? Any comment? Thanks ! Vladimir Strigun commented on HARMONY-410: -- Hi Richard, Thanks for the clarification, I agree that streaming decode is good thing, but I'd like to explain my understanding of specification :) According to specification of CharsetDecoder decoding operation should process by the following steps: 2. Invoke the decode method zero or more times, as long as additional input may be available, passing false for the endOfInput argument and filling the input buffer and flushing the output buffer between invocations; 3. Invoke the decode method one final time, passing true for the endOfInput argument; and then spec also says: The buffers' positions will be advanced to reflect the bytes read and the characters written, but their marks and limits will not be modified I understand these sentences in the next way: invoke decode with endOfInput = false if you have additional input, then fill the buffer (i.e. add to buffer some additional input), invoke decode again and pass correct endOfInput parameter dependent of availability of input. Example you provided is very useful and, of course, 1st option looks better, but what I'm suggest here is to reflect actual processed bytes in input. After first invocation of decode, not all bytes processed actually, i.e. almost all bytes processed, but some stored in decoder to further operation. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Thanks. Vladimir. method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer Key: HARMONY-410 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-410 Project: Harmony Type: Bug Components: Classlib Reporter: Vladimir Strigun Assignee: Mikhail Loenko Priority: Minor Attachments: Harmony-410_patch.txt, harmony-410_test.txt When ByteBuffer contain incomplete sequence of bytes for successful decoding, position in ByteBuffer should be set to latest successful byte. I will attach testcase and patch soon. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira -- Andrew Zhang China Software Development Lab, IBM - Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional
Re: [classlib] [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-410) method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer
Vladimir, Andrew 2006/4/26, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Here I propose two solutions: 1. Set the ByteBuffer to the limit, and store the remaining ByteBuffer in decoder. Invokers doesn't care the position of in. If the result is UNDERFLOW and there're furthur input, just pass the new input to the decoder. It's a typical streaming decoder. That's what Harmony does currently. 2. Decoder doesn't store remaining ByteBuffer. Position of in is set to indicate the remaining ByteBuffer. Invoker should take care to generate new input ByteBuffer for next invocation. RI acts in this way. Both are acceptable. Did I get it right that both solutions do not contradict to the spec and that RI acts as the second one? Thanks, Mikhail However, I think solution 1 is more reasonable. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Yes. In fact, your patch will make Harmony act as the description above. However, I don't think it solve the problem. Maybe invoker is more confusable and may think: Is the remaining bytebuffer maintained in decoder or in ? Shall I get the remaining buffer from in and pass it for next invocation? Anyway, we need a decision on this compatibility issue. By the way, Vladimir, does solution one cause any problem on other classlib implementation? Any comment? Thanks ! Vladimir Strigun commented on HARMONY-410: -- Hi Richard, Thanks for the clarification, I agree that streaming decode is good thing, but I'd like to explain my understanding of specification :) According to specification of CharsetDecoder decoding operation should process by the following steps: 2. Invoke the decode method zero or more times, as long as additional input may be available, passing false for the endOfInput argument and filling the input buffer and flushing the output buffer between invocations; 3. Invoke the decode method one final time, passing true for the endOfInput argument; and then spec also says: The buffers' positions will be advanced to reflect the bytes read and the characters written, but their marks and limits will not be modified I understand these sentences in the next way: invoke decode with endOfInput = false if you have additional input, then fill the buffer (i.e. add to buffer some additional input), invoke decode again and pass correct endOfInput parameter dependent of availability of input. Example you provided is very useful and, of course, 1st option looks better, but what I'm suggest here is to reflect actual processed bytes in input. After first invocation of decode, not all bytes processed actually, i.e. almost all bytes processed, but some stored in decoder to further operation. Is it possible to store bytes in decoder, support streaming decoding, and, at the same time sets correct position in input buffer after each operation? Thanks. Vladimir. method decode(ByteBuffer, CharBuffer, boolean) should set correct position in ByteBuffer Key: HARMONY-410 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-410 Project: Harmony Type: Bug Components: Classlib Reporter: Vladimir Strigun Assignee: Mikhail Loenko Priority: Minor Attachments: Harmony-410_patch.txt, harmony-410_test.txt When ByteBuffer contain incomplete sequence of bytes for successful decoding, position in ByteBuffer should be set to latest successful byte. I will attach testcase and patch soon. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira -- Andrew Zhang China Software Development Lab, IBM - Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
