On Mon, 5 May 2025 13:12:11 GMT, Sean Mullan <mul...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Anthony Scarpino has updated the pull request with a new target base due to >> a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 66 commits: >> >> - major code review comments update >> - Merge branch 'master' into pem >> - Merge branch 'master' into pem >> - javadoc updates >> - code review comments >> - merge with master >> - better comment and remove commented out code >> - Merge branch 'master' into pem >> - Merge branch 'pem-merge' into pem >> - merge >> - ... and 56 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/e2ae50d8...0c540327 > > src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/PEMRecord.java line 46: > >> 44: * <p> {@code PEMRecord} may have a null {@code type} and {@code pem} >> when >> 45: * {@code PEMDecoder.decode()} methods encounter only non-PEM data and >> has >> 46: * reached the end of the stream. If there is PEM data, {@code type} and > > Is this use case important? It seems unusual to call this a DEREncodable if > it only contains non-PEM data. I think it might be better to simply ignore > trailing non-PEM data at the end of a stream which is not attached to any > subsequent PEM objects. This has been address ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17543#discussion_r2089791059
