In: @@ -196,14 +194,32 @@ return len; } + public synchronized byte[] readAllBytes() { + byte[] result = Arrays.copyOfRange(buf, pos, count); + pos = count; + return result; + } + + public synchronized int readNBytes(byte[] b, int off, int len) { + int n = read(b, off, len); + return n == -1 ? 0 : n; + } This probably doesn't need to be synchronized, though I imagine the difference would be minimal. + public synchronized long transferTo(OutputStream out) throws IOException { + int len = count - pos + out.write(but, pos, len); s/but/buf/ I guess? + pos = count; + return len; + } + On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Brian Burkhalter <brian.burkhalter@oracle.com> wrote:

Reprising this thread from three months ago [1].

A patch including the changes suggested below is at

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8180451/webrev.01/

with the differences between this and the prior version at

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8180451/webrev.00-01/

Thanks,

Brian

[1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-December/050550.ht...

On Dec 12, 2017, at 11:42 AM, Paul Sandoz <paul.sandoz@oracle.com> wrote:

...

208 public synchronized long transferTo(OutputStream out) throws IOException { 209 int pos0 = pos; 210 out.write(buf, pos, count - pos); 211 pos = count; 212 return count - pos0; 213 }

int len = count - pos out.write(but, pos, len); pos = count; return len;

On Dec 12, 2017, at 12:23 PM, Brent Christian <brent.christian@oracle.com> wrote:

...

The changes look fine to me. I would have found the test case a little easier to follow if "off"/"len" weren't named so similarly to "offset"/"length", but it's not a big deal.

-- - DML

On Mar 14, 2018, at 9:27 AM, David Lloyd <david.lloyd@redhat.com> wrote:

@@ -196,14 +194,32 @@ return len; }

+ public synchronized byte[] readAllBytes() { + byte[] result = Arrays.copyOfRange(buf, pos, count); + pos = count; + return result; + } + + public synchronized int readNBytes(byte[] b, int off, int len) { + int n = read(b, off, len); + return n == -1 ? 0 : n; + }

This probably doesn't need to be synchronized, though I imagine the difference would be minimal.

You are correct, it does not.

+ public synchronized long transferTo(OutputStream out) throws IOException { + int len = count - pos + out.write(but, pos, len);

s/but/buf/ I guess?

Webrevs corrected in place: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8180451/webrev.00-01/ http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8180451/webrev.01/ Thanks, Brian

Sorry. This looks OK to me (non-reviewer) now. On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Brian Burkhalter <brian.burkhalter@oracle.com> wrote:

This is still in need of final approval, assuming it is OK.

Thanks,

Brian

On Mar 14, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Brian Burkhalter <brian.burkhalter@oracle.com> wrote:

On Mar 14, 2018, at 9:27 AM, David Lloyd <david.lloyd@redhat.com> wrote:

@@ -196,14 +194,32 @@ return len; }

+ public synchronized byte[] readAllBytes() { + byte[] result = Arrays.copyOfRange(buf, pos, count); + pos = count; + return result; + } + + public synchronized int readNBytes(byte[] b, int off, int len) { + int n = read(b, off, len); + return n == -1 ? 0 : n; + }

This probably doesn't need to be synchronized, though I imagine the difference would be minimal.

You are correct, it does not.

+ public synchronized long transferTo(OutputStream out) throws IOException { + int len = count - pos + out.write(but, pos, len);

s/but/buf/ I guess?

Webrevs corrected in place:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8180451/webrev.00-01/ http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8180451/webrev.01/

-- - DML