On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 16:10:17 GMT, Sean Mullan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> For (1), how about something like below:
>>
>>> * <p>The returned parameters may be the same that were used to
>>> initialize
>>> * this cipher, or may contain additional default or random parameter
>>> * values used by the underlying cipher implementation. If no parameters
>>> * is supplied and this cipher successfully generated the required
>>> * parameter values, it will be returned. Otherwise, {@code null} is
>>> * returned.
>
>> Hmm, I tried the suggested approach in (1), the result looks very lengthy.
>> Actually, the Cipher.init(..) methods already has a few paragraphs
>> describing the behavior for parameter generation, perhaps we should not
>> repeat stating the "If this cipher was initialized" vs "was not initialized"
>> since lengthy description may confuse users and have higher risks of
>> inconsistency. What do you think?
>
> That's a good point, the `init` methods do go into a lot of detail about that.
>
>> As for (2), currently only RSASSA-PSS signature impl uses parameters. When
>> specified using PSSParameterSpec, it's possible that some of the parameters
>> are not set, so it's possible for providers to use provider-specific default
>> values for PSS case. So, yes, Signature class may have to updated in the
>> same way to cover this particular scenario.
>
> Ok, I think we should try to make the spec consistent across `Cipher` and
> `Signature` once we settle on the right wording. I think it would be better
> to do it as part of this issue, but I would be ok doing it later as long as
> it is also fixed in 19.
> For (1), how about something like below:
>
> > ```
> > * <p>The returned parameters may be the same that were used to initialize
> > * this cipher, or may contain additional default or random parameter
> > * values used by the underlying cipher implementation.
I like this first sentence.
> > If no parameters
> > * is supplied and this cipher successfully generated the required
> > * parameter values, it will be returned.
What does "successfully" mean? If it wasn't successful, what happens? Maybe we
should avoid that word. How about:
"If parameters were not supplied and this cipher requires parameters, the
returned parameters will contain the parameter values generated by the
underlying cipher implementation."
> > Otherwise, {@code null} is
> > * returned.
> > ```
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8117
