On Thu, 1 Sep 2022 17:27:23 GMT, Lance Andersen <lan...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> It's better. Do you need to explicitly say "For all other cases"? >> >> My original comment was more about explaining `getManifest()` and >> `getNextEntry()` in the same if. It's still doable. > >> It's better. Do you need to explicitly say "For all other cases"? > > I thought it is worth being specific, but happy to leave it out if you and > others prefer >> >> My original comment was more about explaining `getManifest()` and >> `getNextEntry()` in the same if. It's still doable. > > I think the challenge is there is not an exact match to the behavior between > `getManifest()` and `getNext[Jar]Entry()`. We also have the case if the > manifest is the first entry and META-INF/ is the 2nd or later entry, then > META-INF/ will be returned by `JarInputStream`. ` ZipInputStream` will > return all entries which differs from `JarInputStream` so thought it made > sense to be specific but perhaps I am overthinking it. I could do tweak further to say: _`getManifest()` will return the Manifest if it is the first entry or META-INF/ is the first entry and the Manifest is the second entry within the Jar file. When the Manifest is returned by `getManifest()`, the `getNextEntry()` and `getNextJarEntry()` methods will not return the Manifest_ Is that more what you were thinking? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10045
