Am 30.05.2015 um 03:26 schrieb Xueming Shen:
On 5/29/15 4:02 PM, Ulf Zibis wrote:
Am 29.05.2015 um 19:42 schrieb Xueming Shen:
But if it is decided later that we may want to have a separate ext charsets provider2, for
example to split most of the ibm charsets to a separate provider, it might be desired to keep it
as a base class ...
Hm, is it mandatory, that each charset provider must have it's own class?
I also think, that we do not need a separate class for each charset.
No, it's not a "must" to have a separate class for each charset, but it's a logical way to
organize those
charset with their data. Given how most of these charsets are src-generated in current jdk, it's
fair easy
to actually generate a "charset" object from a base classes (SingleByte, or DoubleByte) + a set of
"data"
( such as the name, aliases table, mapping data, etc) during runtime, without
having a real concrete
charset class. But then you need to figure out a better way to organize, store and
read/initialize those
"data" in a optimized way to initialize each charset on the fly, which we are
now utilizing the jvm's
class initialization mechanism to achieve this. Any benefit/advantage of doing
this? We might throw
in some resource someday to gather some data ...
Hi sherman,
I did some work here:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=100090
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=100091
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=100092
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=100095
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=100098
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1000104
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1000105
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1000107
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1000132
Unfortunately the data was moved somewhere. Do you know, where the data was
moved?
One of the original bug reports:
http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6862158
Also I did some work here:
https://java.net/projects/java-nio-charset-enhanced
-Ulf
