On Fri, 20 Feb 2026 22:18:09 GMT, Phil Race <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This fix updates DataBuffer subclasses to actually adhere to their stated >> specifications by rejecting certain invalid parameters for constructors and >> getters and setters. >> A new egression test for each of the constructor and getter/setter cases is >> supplied. >> >> No existing regression tests fail with this change, and standard demos work. >> >> Problems caused by these changes are most likely to occur if the client has >> a bug such that >> - a client uses the constructors that accept an array and then supplies a >> "size" that is greater than the array. >> - a client uses the constructors that accept an array and then supplies a >> "size" that is less than the array and then uses getter/setters that are >> within the array but outside the range specified by size. >> >> Since very few clients (and just one case in the JDK that I found) even use >> these array constructors the changes are unlikely to make a difference to >> clients. >> >> The CSR is ready for review https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8378116 > > Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > 8377568 src/java.desktop/share/classes/java/awt/image/DataBuffer.java line 571: > 569: } > 570: > 571: static final void checkNullArray(Object array, String name) { Do we need this, or can it be replaced with Objects.requireNonNull? Alternatively, can we rely on implicit null checks when checking the size of the array? I think that would produce similar behavior to this method. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/29766#discussion_r2843397802
