Alan,
After staring those simple, 11 lines of change for minutes, I believe we
should simply
go back with the original approach at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/6858865/webrev.00
The change in
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/6858865/webrev.00
obviously is problematic, especially in case like in_len == 0 but
out_len != 0 (no more,
or no more new input, but with a valid output buffer), it's definitely
possible the
inflater/deflater might have more bites to (and should) output in this
scenario, it's a
bug to return 0 here.
Sure it's possible to go further like
if (in_len == 0)
return 0;
....
if (len == 0)
...
But given the purpose of this fix is to solve that particular
"regression" (which actually
does not cause any regression for "mainstream" platforms), I prefer not
take the risk
of causing another real regression/behavior change here, especially we
got burned
couple times here in the past when tried to do better.
Agree?
-Sherman
On 11/19/2010 02:03 PM, Xueming Shen wrote:
On 11/19/2010 01:51 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
Xueming Shen wrote:
:
Why do you want to feed the zlib with a null buffer? :-)
So are you saying that if the length is 0 that it still looks at the
buffer? If so, then I'm okay with the last webrev.
zlib does buffer null check before anything else, just like we do null
check/throw NPE first then
check the offset and length.
-Sherman
