On 2015-10-17 01:37, Xueming Shen wrote:
On 10/16/2015 3:20 PM, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2015-10-16 18:48, Xueming Shen wrote:
looks fine. though it might be better to simply check len !=
b.length, as it's still possible that reallAllBytes
returns a byte[] with length > len, if the entry is
On 10/16/2015 3:20 PM, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2015-10-16 18:48, Xueming Shen wrote:
looks fine. though it might be better to simply check len !=
b.length, as it's still possible that reallAllBytes
returns a byte[] with length > len, if the entry is compressed, and
the "length" in entry does
On 2015-10-16 18:48, Xueming Shen wrote:
looks fine. though it might be better to simply check len != b.length,
as it's still possible that reallAllBytes
returns a byte[] with length > len, if the entry is compressed, and
the "length" in entry does not really
match the length of the bytes from
On 10/16/15 9:24 AM, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2015-10-16 18:02, Xueming Shen wrote:
Why do we no longer check the length of the returned byte[] from
is.readAllBytes() against ze.getSize()?
I think the original IOUtils.readFully() throws EOFE if we don't get
enough bytes.
Good catch, this sh
On 2015-10-16 18:02, Xueming Shen wrote:
Why do we no longer check the length of the returned byte[] from
is.readAllBytes() against ze.getSize()?
I think the original IOUtils.readFully() throws EOFE if we don't get
enough bytes.
Good catch, this should do it:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~red
On 10/16/15 4:49 AM, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2015-10-16 04:09, Xueming Shen wrote:
On 10/15/15 3:08 PM, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2015-10-15 23:21, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 15 Oct 2015, at 21:59, e...@zusammenkunft.net wrote:
Hello,
This does change a bit the semantic of the length check. If
On 16/10/2015 12:49, Claes Redestad wrote:
Correct, but this is still enough to cause statistically significant
increases on our footprint measures.
With a reasonable trust limit this change should be safe while
avoiding most temporary byte[] allocations when reading meta-inf
files. I've ve
On 16/10/15 12:49, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2015-10-16 04:09, Xueming Shen wrote:
On 10/15/15 3:08 PM, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2015-10-15 23:21, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 15 Oct 2015, at 21:59, e...@zusammenkunft.net wrote:
Hello,
This does change a bit the semantic of the length check. If t
On 2015-10-16 04:09, Xueming Shen wrote:
On 10/15/15 3:08 PM, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2015-10-15 23:21, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 15 Oct 2015, at 21:59, e...@zusammenkunft.net wrote:
Hello,
This does change a bit the semantic of the length check. If the
stream would return more bytes than th
On 10/15/15 3:08 PM, Claes Redestad wrote:
On 2015-10-15 23:21, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 15 Oct 2015, at 21:59, e...@zusammenkunft.net wrote:
Hello,
This does change a bit the semantic of the length check. If the
stream would return more bytes than the zipentry says the new
version would ign
> On 15 Oct 2015, at 11:08 p.m., Claes Redestad
> wrote:
>
>
> On 2015-10-15 23:21, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>>> On 15 Oct 2015, at 21:59, e...@zusammenkunft.net wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> This does change a bit the semantic of the length check. If the stream
>>> would return more bytes than
On 2015-10-15 23:21, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 15 Oct 2015, at 21:59, e...@zusammenkunft.net wrote:
Hello,
This does change a bit the semantic of the length check. If the stream would
return more bytes than the zipentry says the new version would ignore them, the
old version was consuming the
;
> Sent: Do., 15 Okt. 2015 22:43
> Subject: RFR [9] 8139706: JarFile.getBytes could use InputStream.readNBytes
>
> Hi all,
>
> java.util.jar.JarFile could be improved further by using
> InputStream.readNBytes when there's information in the ZipEntry about
> the ent
Hi Bernd,
thanks for looking at this!
You're right about the semantic change for this patch in isolation, but
compared to the previous implementation that used sun.misc.IOUtils the
semantics are unchanged (compare with theprevious implementation of
JarFiles::getBytes and sun.misc.IOUtils::rea
://bernd.eckenfels.net
-Original Message-
From: Claes Redestad
To: "core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net Libs"
Sent: Do., 15 Okt. 2015 22:43
Subject: RFR [9] 8139706: JarFile.getBytes could use InputStream.readNBytes
Hi all,
java.util.jar.JarFile could be improved furthe
Hi all,
java.util.jar.JarFile could be improved further by using
InputStream.readNBytes when there's information in the ZipEntry about
the entry size.
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8139706/webrev.01/
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139706
Testing: verified impro
16 matches
Mail list logo
