On 29/11/2013 15:46, Alex Yursha wrote:
// make sure ap.path is longer so a.b.* doesn't imply a.b
^.
Somebody has removed the full stop from the sentence fragment. I'll give
you that this class API docs should be better.
return (that.path.length() > this.path.length()) &&
that.path.startsWith(this.path);
As the highlighted comment states, the length comparison check is
performed in order to prevent such cases where "a.b.*" would imply
"a.b". But the contract for java.lang.String.startsWith() is such that
if the prefix length is greater than the string length than that test
will fail. So it seems like java.security.BasicPermission.implies()
tries to duplicate the check that is performed by
java.lang.String.startswith() out of the box.
So, suppose we had permissions with names "a.b.*" and "a.b.". These have
paths "a.b." and "a.b." (respectively, or not). startsWith will return
true, but the length comparison false.
So
- the check is not redundant
- a.b. is not implied by a.b.*
- BasicPermission does not correctly specify behaviour of wildcards
(should probably have a CR)
Tom
