On Thu, 12 May 2022 18:23:18 GMT, Sean Mullan <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Fixed the nit. Thanks~
>> As for the part about returning the parameters as `{@code
>> AlgorithmParameters}`, it should be covered by current sentence, i.e. `and
>> can be generated by the signature`. Perhaps we don't have to spell out all
>> possible causes where the parameter can't be generated?
>
> That sentence is specifically if the caller did not specify parameters
> though. The previous wording is if the caller did specify parameters (as say
> an `AlgorithmParameterSpec`) and the implementation cannot return them as
> `AlgorithmParameters`. So I think it needs to be mentioned as it is kind of
> surprising if you specify parameters to `init` but `getParameters` returns
> null.
Hmm, would it fall under the "Otherwise, null is returned"? If not, perhaps we
can add back the part about returning AlgorithmParameters as below:
**If the underlying signature implementation supports returning the parameters
as {@code AlgorithmParameters},** the returned parameters may be the same that
were used to initialize
this signature, or may contain additional default or random parameter values
used by the underlying signature scheme. If the required parameters were not
supplied and can be generated by the signature, the generated parameters are
returned. Otherwise, {@code null} is returned.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/8396
