Re: RFR: 8313226: Redundant condition test in X509CRLImpl

2023-08-01 Thread John Jiang
On Tue, 1 Aug 2023 15:22:48 GMT, Jamil Nimeh wrote: >> if ((nextByte == DerValue.tag_SequenceOf) >> && (! ((nextByte & 0x0c0) == 0x080))) { >> ... >> ... >> } >> >> If `nextByte` is `DerValue.tag_SequenceOf`, exactly `0x30`, then the test >> after `&&` should always be true. > >

Re: RFR: 8313226: Redundant condition test in X509CRLImpl

2023-08-01 Thread Jamil Nimeh
On Thu, 27 Jul 2023 04:00:21 GMT, John Jiang wrote: > if ((nextByte == DerValue.tag_SequenceOf) > && (! ((nextByte & 0x0c0) == 0x080))) { > ... > ... > } > > If `nextByte` is `DerValue.tag_SequenceOf`, exactly `0x30`, then the test > after `&&` should always be true. The change

Re: RFR: 8313226: Redundant condition test in X509CRLImpl

2023-08-01 Thread John Jiang
On Thu, 27 Jul 2023 04:00:21 GMT, John Jiang wrote: > if ((nextByte == DerValue.tag_SequenceOf) > && (! ((nextByte & 0x0c0) == 0x080))) { > ... > ... > } > > If `nextByte` is `DerValue.tag_SequenceOf`, exactly `0x30`, then the test > after `&&` should always be true. Could this

RFR: 8313226: Redundant condition test in X509CRLImpl

2023-07-26 Thread John Jiang
if ((nextByte == DerValue.tag_SequenceOf) && (! ((nextByte & 0x0c0) == 0x080))) { ... ... } If `nextByte` is `DerValue.tag_SequenceOf`, exactly `0x30`, then the test after `&&` should always be true. - Commit messages: - 8313226: Redundant condition test in X509CRLI