On Apr 30, 2013, at 9:35 AM, Paul Sandoz <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Apr 30, 2013, at 5:43 PM, Henry Jen <henry....@oracle.com> wrote: >> >>> So if possible we should report ORDERED and state the association, if any, >>> of encounter order with the order declared in the central directory, which >>> i hope is, and seems to be, the same. (Plus update the docs of entries() >>> too.) >>> >> >> I agree with you entries() and streams() should be in sync on ordering. >> Spec-wise, I have no clear preference. > >> But when I looked into a zip file archive, I always would like to see >> entries in alphabetic order so I can find the files I really care, which >> will also have directory structure nicely. Order in central directory not >> necessary helping me. >> > > There does appear to be a well-defined encounter order. I don't think most > developers will consider the collection of zip entries to behave like a Set. > It is more list-like. For what it's worth, as a random developer that has used Zip[Input,Output]Stream on occasion, I sometimes depend on the ordering property for application specific uses. The most common is if you are taking a "hot backup" or "hot restore" of some sort of data structure, you would wish to ensure that data is written in / out in "data dependency order" so that you don't write references to data that has not been restored yet. I am not sure that this is a good justification for keeping the stream ORDERED, but maybe it is. Best, Steven
