 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / General / November 2006Why no close() method for the File object ?
I am using the File object in an app. I noticed there is no close() method for it. Why not ? What am I missing ? Does Java just rely on the object going out of scope to close the file ? Or does one only have to close the stream associated with the file ? Thanks. > I am using the File object in an app. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Does Java just rely on the object going out of scope to close the file ? > Or does one only have to close the stream associated with the file ? You don't close the file, you close the stream.  Signaturesimon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ ;; Perl ... is the Brittney Spears of programming - easily accessible ;; but, in the final analysis, empty of any significant thought ;; Frank Adrian on Slashdot, 21st July 2003 me2 schrieb: > I am using the File object in an app. > > I noticed there is no close() method for it. Why not ? What am I missing ? You can't open a File object - so you can't close it. A File object is just "an abstract representation of file and directory pathnames" [API]. > Does Java just rely on the object going out of scope to close the file ? > Or does one only have to close the stream associated with the file ? There's no stream associated with a File object. But you can open streams by passing File objeocts to their cnstructors or methods respecutively. And, yes, yo've to close the stream. Bye Michael > me2 schrieb: >> I am using the File object in an app. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > streams by passing File objeocts to their cnstructors or methods > respecutively. And, yes, yo've to close the stream. I think some confusion could have been avoided if it had been called "java.io.PathName" instead of "java.io.File". For example, the exists() method makes sense as an instance method, because there may not be any file matching the path name. The lack of open and close methods also makes more sense when you think of it as a path name rather than a file. Patricia Patricia Shanahan schrieb: > I think some confusion could have been avoided if it had been called > "java.io.PathName" instead of "java.io.File". Right. Michael > I am using the File object in an app. > > I noticed there is no close() method for it. Why not ? What am I missing ? It represents a file (really a file path). It does not represent an open file channel. > Does Java just rely on the object going out of scope to close the file ? > Or does one only have to close the stream associated with the file ? No. If you have a file *stream* then you make sure you always close it: public void write(File file) throws IOException { OutputStream rawOut = new FileOutputStream(file); try { BufferedOutputStream out = new BufferedOutputStream(rawOut); out.write(42); ... out.flush(); } finally { rawOut.close(); } } Note, it's important to flush the buffered output in the happy case. BufferedOutputStream.close is broken. Tom Hawtin > BufferedOutputStream.close is broken. It is ? How, and since when ? The version in 1.5 (actually inherited from FilterOutputStream) looks OK to me. -- chris >> BufferedOutputStream.close is broken. > > It is ? How, and since when ? The version in 1.5 (actually inherited from > FilterOutputStream) looks OK to me. Ignoring an exception is almost always a mistake. public void close() throws IOException { try { flush(); } catch (IOException ignored) { } out.close(); } Suppose flush causes your file to exceed the disk capacity. An exception is thrown, but ignored. The stream is the closed normally and no exception is thrown. A better implementation would be: public void close() throws IOException { try { flush(); } finally { out.close(); } } Tom Hawtin >>> BufferedOutputStream.close is broken. >> >> It is ? How, and since when ? The version in 1.5 (actually inherited >> from >> FilterOutputStream) looks OK to me. > A better implementation would be: See Bug 6390383 http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6390383 (It' me with the first comment. I don't think the tickbox survives indirection through the Sun Online thingy login page.) Tom Hawtin > > > BufferedOutputStream.close is broken. > > > > It is ? How, and since when ? The version in 1.5 (actually inherited > > from FilterOutputStream) looks OK to me. > > Ignoring an exception is almost always a mistake. [...] Ah, I see what you mean -- I was expecting to see broken buffering code. I agree that the empty exception handler is just silly. -- chris Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.