Thomas DeWeese: > > Really in my mind the main issue is that you should be able to call > > flush whenever you want and not cause real havok which isn't the > > case without the proposed patch.
jonathan wood: > I agree...why the "closed" underlying stream allows modification seems a bit > perverse. I agree with both of those points. The simple fix of not writing a zero length IDAT chunk when flush() is called seems best to me. -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: batik-users-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: batik-users-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
