On 22 October 2013 05:49, Damjan Jovanovic <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:02 AM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: >>> + >>> + public byte[] getComment() { >>> + return comment; >> >> This is better, but the array can still be modified externally. >> >> Might make more sense to convert the array to a String and return that >> instead - Strings are immutable, but arrays are not. >> Otherwise perhaps return a copy. >> > > The text encoding for the JPEG COM segment is unspecified, and can be > anything in practice, including binary data instead of text, so we > have to return a byte[].
I suggested returning a String because the only usage I found immediately converted the bytes into a String. > I am concerned about the performance implications of copying data > around so much, but guess it's not much data. Sometimes it may be necessary to pass around arrays, in which case the mutability needs to be clearly documented. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
