On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:33:43 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Markus KARG has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> HexPrinter::transferTo
>
> It looks like this patch is against a repository that hasn't been sync'ed up
> since late
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 16:29:39 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> BIS dates from JDK 1.0 and it's not hard to find examples that extend it.
>> The HexPrinter test reminds us that it has been possible for 25+ years to
>> override the read methods and snoop on all bytes that are read. Adding an
>>
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 17:11:39 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Thank you all for your kind help and feedback.
>>
>> @AlanBateman So is now the time to switch this PR from Draft to Ready?
>
> The source changes LGTM. I suppose you should now revert the changes above
> (in `HexPrinter.java`), otherwise
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 17:01:09 GMT, Markus KARG wrote:
>>> @AlanBateman Async close leaves BIS in an invalid state. The JavaDocs say `
>>> The behavior for the case where the input and/or output stream is
>>> asynchronously closed, or the thread interrupted during the transfer, is
>>> highly
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 16:29:39 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> BIS dates from JDK 1.0 and it's not hard to find examples that extend it.
>> The HexPrinter test reminds us that it has been possible for 25+ years to
>> override the read methods and snoop on all bytes that are read. Adding an
>>
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 12:14:37 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> With the changes you proposed a CSR will definitely be needed.
>
> BIS dates from JDK 1.0 and it's not hard to find examples that extend it. The
> HexPrinter test reminds us that it has been possible for 25+ years to
> override the read
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 13:00:23 GMT, Markus KARG wrote:
>> Rebased and fixed locking, using your proposed code now.
>>
>> @AlanBateman Async close leaves BIS in an invalid state. The JavaDocs say `
>> The behavior for the case where the inputand/or output stream is
>> asynchronously closed, or
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 12:32:46 GMT, Markus KARG wrote:
>> BIS dates from JDK 1.0 and it's not hard to find examples that extend it.
>> The HexPrinter test reminds us that it has been possible for 25+ years to
>> override the read methods and snoop on all bytes that are read. Adding an
>>
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 12:56:46 GMT, Markus KARG wrote:
>> Thank you for your decision about this issue, so instead of fixing the
>> existing bugs I will implement as you outlined.
>>
>> BTW, locking and rebasing is on the way.
>
> Rebased and fixed locking, using your proposed code now.
>
>
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 12:14:37 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> With the changes you proposed a CSR will definitely be needed.
>
> BIS dates from JDK 1.0 and it's not hard to find examples that extend it. The
> HexPrinter test reminds us that it has been possible for 25+ years to
> override the read
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 12:10:00 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>>> It's a well known behavior that overriding the`read(...)` method is
>>> sufficient to implement subclass behavior. This will no longer be the case
>>> if `transferTo(...)` no longer calls `this.read(...)` as it used to. There
>>> are
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 11:26:18 GMT, Markus KARG wrote:
>> It's a well known behavior that overriding the`read(...)` method is
>> sufficient to implement subclass behavior. This will no longer be the case
>> if `transferTo(...)` no longer calls `this.read(...)` as it used to. There
>> are many
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 09:49:16 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> It's a well known behavior that overriding the`read(...)` method is
> sufficient to implement subclass behavior. This will no longer be the case if
> `transferTo(...)` no longer calls `this.read(...)` as it used to. There are
> many
On Tue, 6 Sep 2022 07:55:55 GMT, Markus KARG wrote:
>> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/hexdump/HexPrinter.java line 1194:
>>
>>> 1192: byteOffset += size;
>>> 1193: return size;
>>> 1194: }
>>
>> This is an indication that overriding `transferTo()` in
>>
On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 20:21:01 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Markus KARG has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> HexPrinter::transferTo
>
> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/hexdump/HexPrinter.java line 1194:
>
>> 1192: byteOffset
On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:05:04 GMT, Markus KARG wrote:
>> Implementation of JDK-8279283
>
> Markus KARG has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> HexPrinter::transferTo
test/lib/jdk/test/lib/hexdump/HexPrinter.java line 1194:
> 1192:
On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:05:04 GMT, Markus KARG wrote:
>> Implementation of JDK-8279283
>
> Markus KARG has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> HexPrinter::transferTo
It looks like this patch is against a repository that hasn't been
> Implementation of JDK-8279283
Markus KARG has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
HexPrinter::transferTo
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/6935/files
- new:
18 matches
Mail list logo
