On Wed, 6 Aug 2025 21:41:27 GMT, Alisen Chung <ach...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
>> commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   8277585
>
> src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/imageio/stream/FileCacheImageOutputStream.java
>  line 238:
> 
>> 236:         private volatile boolean disposed;
>> 237: 
>> 238:         public FileCacheDisposerRecord(File cacheFile, RandomAccessFile 
>> cache) {
> 
> FileCacheDisposer makes more sense based on what the code does, but would 
> StreamDisposerRecord be better to remain consistent for the input/output 
> streams?

Sure, see comment below.

> src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/imageio/stream/FileCacheImageOutputStream.java
>  line 249:
> 
>> 247:             }
>> 248:             try {
>> 249:                 cache.close();
> 
> I notice a similar nested class/method in FileCacheImageInputStream with a 
> few differences. Does the cache.close() and cacheFile.delete need to be 
> wrapped in null checks? And once deleted do the StreamDisposerRecord pointers 
> (this.cacheFile and this.cache) need to be set to null like in the 
> ImageInputStream version of the code?

Yes, I could re-use that. I just need to make it accessible .. but not public.
That one has null checks because it clears the vars. 
My version uses a "disposed" var for the same since I made those vars final.

> src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/imageio/stream/package-info.java line 60:
> 
>> 58:  * {@snippet lang='java':
>> 59:  * try (FileOutputStream fos = new FileOutputStream("out.jpg");
>> 60:  *     (ImageOutputStream ios = new FileCacheImageOutputStream(fos, 
>> null)) {
> 
> I think there is an extra left parenthesis here at the start of the line

fixed

> src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/imageio/stream/package-info.java line 66:
> 
>> 64:  * }
>> 65:  * <p>
>> 66:  * Sub-classers of these Image I/O API stream types can to a limited 
>> extent protect
> 
> Commas missing here
> `Sub-classers of these Image I/O API stream types can, to a limited extent, 
> protect`

ok

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26650#discussion_r2258441776
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26650#discussion_r2258441819
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26650#discussion_r2258443191
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26650#discussion_r2258447549

Reply via email to