Hi All:
After skimming through the source code of java.io.File, I found two
tweaked method names:
private native boolean isReadOnlyImpl(byte[] filePath);
private native boolean isWriteOnlyImpl(byte[] filePath);
Take isWriteOnlyImpl as an example,
canRead ->
exists && !Java_java_io_File_isWriteOnlyImpl() -> => this method
is in native\luni\shared\file.c
getPlatformIsWriteOnly() => this method is in
native\luni\linux\helpers.c, and the follow is the code snippet
if (buffer.st_uid == geteuid ())
return (buffer.st_mode & S_IRUSR) == 0;
else if (buffer.st_gid == getegid ())
return (buffer.st_mode & S_IRGRP) == 0;
return (buffer.st_mode & S_IROTH) == 0;
The name isWriteOnlyImpl is confusing, negate the return value of
isWriteOnlyImpl and uses it in canRead is confusing,
in native method getPlatformIsWriteOnly(), prob S_IRXXX bit is also
confusing and can not express the meaning writeOnly. Correct me if I am
wrong.
Since isWriteOnlyImpl is only utilized by canRead, I suggest the following:
change isWriteOnlyImpl to isReadableImpl, getPlatformIsWriteOnly to
getPlatformIsReadable and do the negation in getPlatformIsReadable:
canRead ->
exists && Java_java_io_File_isReadOnlyImpl() -> getPlatformIsReadable()
if (buffer.st_uid == geteuid ())
return (buffer.st_mode & S_IRUSR) != 0;
else if (buffer.st_gid == getegid ())
return (buffer.st_mode & S_IRGRP) != 0;
return (buffer.st_mode & S_IROTH) != 0;
This way, code is more readable and the method name
getPlatformIsReadable semantically matches it implemantation.
(The original name getPlatformIsWriteOnly seems not consistent with its
implmentation, correct me if I am wrong).
If no one objects, I want to supply a patch to do the enhancement.
Best regards
--
Spark Shen
China Software Development Lab, IBM
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
