On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 06:31:51 GMT, Bradford Wetmore <wetm...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> JDK-8284112 Minor cleanup could be done in javax.crypto
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/CipherInputStream.java line 159:
> 
>> 157:         try {
>> 158:             ofinish = cipher.update(ibuffer, 0, readin, obuffer, 
>> ostart);
>> 159:         } catch (IllegalStateException e) {
> 
> This is another one of those I would probably leave alone, just so it's clear 
> what should be done.

Keeping the original.

> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/CipherSpi.java line 29:
> 
>> 27: 
>> 28: import java.nio.ByteBuffer;
>> 29: import java.security.*;
> 
> This is another one that some people will complain about.  I personally 
> prefer this style, others prefer everything written out as long as it's not 
> "too many."

Keeping the change for now.

> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/CryptoPermission.java line 437:
> 
>> 435:             // may be the best try.
>> 436:             return this.algParamSpec.equals(algParamSpec);
>> 437:         } else return !this.checkParam;
> 
> Please use the standard coding format.
> 
>     } else { 
>         return !this.checkParam;
>     }
> 
> or
> 
>     } 
>     
>     return !this.checkParam;

Using the first format.

> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/CryptoPermissions.java line 158:
> 
>> 156: 
>> 157:     /**
>> 158:      * Checks if this object's PermissionCollection for permissions
> 
> Just FYI and not for this review, but this class should really be updated to 
> use proper javadoc comment style, which is to tag all objects with < code 
> >PermissionCollection< /code >

No change required.

> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/ExemptionMechanism.java line 142:
> 
>> 140:      * @see java.security.Provider
>> 141:      */
>> 142:     public static ExemptionMechanism getInstance(String algorithm)
> 
> Others might disagree with this comment, but I would encourage you not to 
> make these changes throughout your PR.  (@jddarcy ?) 
> 
> Even though a static method is implicitly final and IJ is correct, the final 
> keyword does prevent subclasses from inadvertently using the same method 
> signature.  
> 
> Once this is resolved, I can approve.

Keeping the original here and elsewhere.

> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/SealedObject.java line 449:
> 
>> 447: final class extObjectInputStream extends ObjectInputStream {
>> 448:     extObjectInputStream(InputStream in)
>> 449:         throws IOException {
> 
> This is another "I probably wouldn't do that..."  
> 
> It's nice to know what kind of IOExceptions you might get, so leaving 
> StreamCorruptedException is ok.

Keeping the original. Still, why would IJ suggest removing this unless it had 
already figured out the exception could never happen?

> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/spec/DESKeySpec.java line 49:
> 
>> 47:      * Weak/semi-weak keys copied from FIPS 74.
>> 48:      *
>> 49:      * "...The first 6 keys have duals different from themselves, hence
> 
> Suggest you leave this alone as this is a direct quote from FIPS 74 (page 10).

Keeping the original.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8214

Reply via email to