Github user kvr000 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/commons-compress/pull/21#discussion_r112838864
--- Diff:
src/main/java/org/apache/commons/compress/archivers/zip/ZipFile.java ---
@@ -1111,14 +1122,11 @@ public int read() throws IOException {
}
return -1;
}
- synchronized (archive) {
- archive.position(loc++);
- int read = read(1);
- if (read < 0) {
- return read;
- }
- return buffer.get() & 0xff;
+ int read = read(loc++, 1);
+ if (read < 0) {
--- End diff --
Correct, bodewig. Additionally, note that in these terms the original
implementation wasn't thread-safe - in the byte[] read method the loc
incrementing is outside the synchronized too.
Anyway, there are two options - either make the full methods synchronized
(the single stream would hardly ever be accessed concurrently so keeping
smaller scope won't make any difference).
Or, better option would be to keep this implementation unsynchronized as
it's wrapped into another decompressing stream anyway and this one already has
to be synchronized. The only exception is STORED compression method where we
would have to wrap into synchronized proxy.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
