Review/comment needed for the new public java.util.Base64 class
Alan.Bateman at oracle.com
Fri Oct 12 10:56:29 UTC 2012
On 11/10/2012 19:30, Ariel Weisberg wrote:
> I know that ByteBuffers are pain, but I did notice that you can't
> specify a source/dest pair when using ByteBuffers and that ByteBuffers
> without arrays have to be copied. I don't see a simple safe way to
> normalize access to them the way you can if everything is a byte array.
I agree, encode/decode methods where the destination is a given
ByteBuffer would be desirable (and probably more useful than returning a
new ByteBuffer each time). Byte arrays are so commonly used that it
probably justifying having both variants as proposed.
More information about the core-libs-dev