On 1/18/19 3:11 PM, Peter Levart wrote:
You meant package-private constructor, right? Protected constructor would allow subclassing MapMode by arbitrary user class which is not what would be desirable.
...unless you actually want users to construct their own MapMode(s), like you mentioned is the case with FileChannel.open() and FileAttribute interface. But there this makes sense because the backend (FileSystem) is also pluggable, so users can define their own FileSystem implementations that consume their own FileAttribute(s)...
Are you proposing to add an spi for MappedByteBuffer's here? That would be an overkill for this feature, I think...
Regards, Peter
