On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 12:42:25 GMT, Daniel Gredler <[email protected]> wrote:
> True. I'll tweak the PR to address this and see how it looks. Thanks. It would need to be specified so that it's clear that the method is not a "hook" to expand the capacity, it's simply a connivance method for subclasses override the existing methods or adding new write methods that are not based on the write methods in the superclass. > What would you think about renaming the method to `setMinCapacity` in order > to reduce conflict risk? Roger's point about reduced visibility conflicts is > a good one, given the established use of the `ensureCapacity` name. I think it would be useful some static analysis to get a sense for how many libraries extend BAOS and have their own ensureCapacity method. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/29180#issuecomment-3760827724
