It looks fine...I hope you guys also have some tests over there to bring in more confidence :-)
It might be "easier" to simply update the original haveZIP64() with the code we have in zip_util.c in which we also try to read the end64 to verify if we really have one. Your choice though. -Sherman On 03/25/2015 09:55 AM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Yeah, this review is kinda scary. There's a lot of technical debt here, and this change only addresses some of it. A variant of this code is in use at Google. On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Martin Buchholz <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Xueming and Alan, I'd like you to do a code review. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073158 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/0xffff-entries-zip-file/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Emartin/webrevs/openjdk9/0xffff-entries-zip-file/> Of course, the really correct thing is to have at most one zip implementation per programming language, but I'm not trying to fix that here (how many zip implementations does openjdk have?)
