On Tue, 8 Oct 2024 12:32:00 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <j...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I would treat this specific scenario as one of the "no concurrent usage"
>> examples. Note that by this principle, mutable objects like `StringBuilder`
>> should not override object comparison methods as these states can change,
>> but they do :(
>
>> The question is: Would that make any sense in the end?
>
> Consider the example of `StringBuffer`, which is a `CharSequence`. Wouldn't
> something like the following be a logical use of `Reader.of(CharSequence)`,
> where you create a `Reader` for the underlying sequence (which is not yet
> populated) and then keep reading through the `Reader` until the underlying
> sequence's data is finished?
>
>
> final StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
> try (final Reader reader = Reader.of(sb)) {
> final ContentGenerator cg = new ContentGenerator(sb);
> Thread.ofPlatform().start(cg);
> int numRead = 0;
> while (numRead != -1) {
> final char[] content = new char[1024];
> numRead = reader.read(content); // wait for content
> }
> }
>
> private class ContentGenerator {
> final StringBuffer sb;
> ContentGenerator(StringBuffer sb) {
> this.sb = sb;
> }
>
> @Override
> run() {
> while (true) {
> String foo = getSomeContent(); // maybe blocking
> sb.append(foo);
> }
> }
> }
> I cannot image any scenario where such a program would result in useful
> outcome.
An additional point of reference is the current default implementation of
CharSequence's `public default IntStream chars()`, which returns an IntStream
of char values from the sequence and the implementation of which doesn't
consider the `length()` to be fixed.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21371#discussion_r1791811620
