• 0

WHILE loops and InputStreams


Question

18 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0


ByteArrayInputStream is = ...;
ByteArrayOutputStream os = ...;
byte[] buf = new byte[4096];
int read;
while ((read=is.read(buf, 0, 4096)) {
//Do something with contents of buf
//Like write to a ByteArrayOutputStream
os.write(buf, 0, read);
}
os.toByteArray();
[/CODE]

Of course you can use a third party library such as Apache commons-io and its IOUtils class to read the whole thing without a loop. Larger buffer sizes may be beneficial too, but it may just depend on what you're doing with what you're reading.

  • 0


ByteArrayInputStream is = ...;
ByteArrayOutputStream os = ...;
byte[] buf = new byte[4096];
int read;
while ((read=is.read(buf, 0, 4096)) {
//Do something with contents of buf
//Like write to a ByteArrayOutputStream
os.write(buf, 0, read);
}
os.toByteArray();
[/CODE]

Of course you can use a third party library such as Apache commons-io and its IOUtils class to read the whole thing without a loop. Larger buffer sizes may be beneficial too, but it may just depend on what you're doing with what you're reading.

cheers :p will have to try it .... im just trying to read 256b nothing huge

  • 0


ByteArrayInputStream is = ...;
ByteArrayOutputStream os = ...;
byte[] buf = new byte[4096];
int read;
while ((read=is.read(buf, 0, 4096)) {
//Do something with contents of buf
//Like write to a ByteArrayOutputStream
os.write(buf, 0, read);
}
os.toByteArray();
[/CODE]

Of course you can use a third party library such as Apache commons-io and its IOUtils class to read the whole thing without a loop. Larger buffer sizes may be beneficial too, but it may just depend on what you're doing with what you're reading.

refering back to this .... how do I write information to the new byte xD i have never worked with bytes before xD , obviously i see your write thing ...but I dont understand it so im not going to use it xD do i need to byte up a string and then add it to the new byte

  • 0

what would i need to do to this ... to send and receive just bytes... the whole point is to send the bytes and then it converted into a string on the other side (this is to sort out a previous issue I have with sending encrypted strings and them not keeping formating )


import java.io.*;
import java.net.*;
public class chatServer
{
public static void main (String[] args) throws IOException
{
ServerSocket serverSocket = null;

try
{
serverSocket = new ServerSocket (4444);
}
catch (IOException e)
{
System.err.println ("Could not listen on port: 4444.");
System.exit (1);
}

System.out.println ("Server - Listening on port 4444");
Socket clientSocket = null;

try
{
clientSocket = serverSocket.accept ();
}
catch (IOException e)
{
System.err.println ("Accept failed."); System.exit(1);
}

PrintWriter out = new PrintWriter (clientSocket.getOutputStream(), true);
BufferedReader in = new BufferedReader (new InputStreamReader (clientSocket.getInputStream ()));
String toClient, fromClient;
toClient = "Hello";
System.out.println ("Server Message: " + toClient);
out.println (toClient);
fromClient = in.readLine ();
System.out.println ("Client Message: " + fromClient);
out.close ();
in.close ();
clientSocket.close ();
serverSocket.close ();
}
}
[/CODE]

  • 0


import java.io.*;
import java.net.*;
public class chatServer
{
public static void main (String[] args) throws IOException
{
ServerSocket serverSocket = null;

try
{
serverSocket = new ServerSocket (4444);
}
catch (IOException e)
{
System.err.println ("Could not listen on port: 4444.");
System.exit (1);
}

System.out.println ("Server - Listening on port 4444");
Socket clientSocket = null;

try
{
clientSocket = serverSocket.accept ();
}
catch (IOException e)
{
System.err.println ("Accept failed."); System.exit(1);
}

PrintWriter out = new PrintWriter (clientSocket.getOutputStream(), true);
BufferedReader in = new BufferedReader (new InputStreamReader (clientSocket.getInputStream ()));
String toClient, fromClient;
toClient = "Hello";
System.out.println ("Server Message: " + toClient);
out.println (toClient);
CharArrayWriter os = new CharArrayWriter();
char[] buf = new char[4096];
int read;
while ((read=in.read(buf, 0, 4096)) {
os.write(buf, 0, read);
}
fromClient = os.toString();
System.out.println ("Client Message: " + fromClient);
out.close ();
in.close ();
clientSocket.close ();
serverSocket.close ();
}
}
[/CODE]

Since you're just passing strings and using a BufferedReader which is character specific, I've change it to a CharArrayWriter which is the equivalent of a ByteArrayOutputStream.

You may also want to call flush() on your PrintWriter to send the data to the client immediately if you'll be keeping it open longer than you are now.

  • 0

Since you're just passing strings and using a BufferedReader which is character specific, I've change it to a CharArrayWriter which is the equivalent of a ByteArrayOutputStream.

You may also want to call flush() on your PrintWriter to send the data to the client immediately if you'll be keeping it open longer than you are now.

ye it will be open longer I have code from that but I have stripped it down to bare basics just to play around and get to understanding it.... so lets say I wanted to send a massive string .... and recieve it all the other side in the same format as its sent ? what would I do ... I have written a huge encryption chat program and got it working except for the decrypting on the receiving side because when it sends the encrypted string the format never sends the same for some reason and I dunno why .... if I start a private chat with you would you be able to help me ?

I am really stuck REALLY stuck this problem of the encrypted string is just messing with me

  • 0

when i send an encrypted string it has a size of 256 .... when I receive it I get it in seval patches between 1-256 bits a time ... I know it works cause by pure chance it sent correct once and decrypted ... but every other time it messes up the spaces, lines, formatting ... only gets a certain amount and starts processing before the rest comes through etc

  • 0

when i send an encrypted string it has a size of 256 .... when I receive it I get it in seval patches between 1-256 bits a time ... I know it works cause by pure chance it sent correct once and decrypted ... but every other time it messes up the spaces, lines, formatting ... only gets a certain amount and starts processing before the rest comes through etc

Are you calling flush() when you're sending? You were also using readline before instead of reading the whole string. Use the modified code I posted and that should read everything in. Not sure what happened to it, but the forum seems to have devoured the greater than 0 on the while loop (i.e. read until there's nothing left). You could also try using UDP which is less reliable on whether you'll know you sent the message fine, but it also sends it all at once. You also may want to develop a message format with a delimiter string and possibly a header that would let your receiver know the size of the message it should expect.

  • 0

Are you calling flush() when you're sending? You were also using readline before instead of reading the whole string. Use the modified code I posted and that should read everything in. Not sure what happened to it, but the forum seems to have devoured the greater than 0 on the while loop (i.e. read until there's nothing left). You could also try using UDP which is less reliable on whether you'll know you sent the message fine, but it also sends it all at once. You also may want to develop a message format with a delimiter string and possibly a header that would let your receiver know the size of the message it should expect.

ok i shall give that a go... but with your code it keeps telling me im trying to convert an int to a booleen ....obviously its something to do with the equals ... but ye it seems to dislike me ...

  • 0

also i copied and pasted your code in ? but im assume as you said it removed the another while statement you had previously.

I fixed the code, now just trying to get it to actually read the input...


import java.io.*;
import java.net.*;
public class chatServer
{
public static void main (String[] args) throws IOException
{
ServerSocket serverSocket = null;
try
{
serverSocket = new ServerSocket (4444);
}
catch (IOException e)
{
System.err.println ("Could not listen on port: 4444.");
System.exit (1);
}
System.out.println ("Server - Listening on port 4444");
Socket clientSocket = null;
try
{
clientSocket = serverSocket.accept ();
}
catch (IOException e)
{
System.err.println ("Accept failed."); System.exit(1);
}
PrintWriter out = new PrintWriter (clientSocket.getOutputStream(), true);
BufferedReader in = new BufferedReader (new InputStreamReader (clientSocket.getInputStream ()));
String toClient, fromClient;
toClient = "Hello";
System.out.println ("Server Message: " + toClient);
out.println (toClient);
CharArrayWriter os = new CharArrayWriter();
char[] buf = new char[4096];
int read;
while ((read=in.read(buf, 0, 4096))==0) {
System.out.println("x");
os.write(buf, 0, read);

}
fromClient = os.toString();
System.out.println ("Client Message: " + fromClient);
out.close ();
in.close ();
clientSocket.close ();
serverSocket.close ();
}
}
[/CODE]

  • 0

It should be while read greater than 0. For some reason Neowin is taking out the >.

while ((read > in.read(buf, , 4096))==) {

is that what you mean ? sorry I am not following what you are trying to say (i know what you are saying but I dont see where i have to put the > ... :p )

  • 0

while ((read=in.read(buf, , 4096)) > ) {

this is going good so far :D just one smmmallllll issue .... the code I have at the moment only works if the sending is within the while loop (which is fine) but its adding all the previous messages on to it :3 imma try flushing it but im pretty sure that will just clear everything except the last byte

  • 0

this is going good so far :D just one smmmallllll issue .... the code I have at the moment only works if the sending is within the while loop (which is fine) but its adding all the previous messages on to it :3 imma try flushing it but im pretty sure that will just clear everything except the last byte

It's not something like you're re-using the CharArrayWriter instance without calling reset() on it, is it?

  • 0

It's not something like you're re-using the CharArrayWriter instance without calling reset() on it, is it?

it might be O.o .... im not that knowledgeable on all these things yet ... I only know whatI have used and i have never used the reset xD last year all my work was mainly GUI and logic based rather then using all the libraries :p i will look into this reset function .... I tried nulling it so javas garbage collection would handle it but that messed things up

  • 0

It's not something like you're re-using the CharArrayWriter instance without calling reset() on it, is it?

ok reset and all that works BUT OMG 2bytes are being added somewhere and I dont know why or how ... it says on the sending side its 256...then on the recieving side when it goes to decrypt it... its apprently 258 ...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Glad these prices are starting to come down, but that is still crazy. I bought the 2TB 9100 Pro (slightly more expensive version with PCIe 5.0) last year for $240.
    • The 2TB Samsung 990 PRO NVMe SSD hits lowest price in over three months by Sayan Sen Yesterday, we covered a really good deal wherein you can get a 4TB TeamGroup T-FORCE G50 NVMe PCIe Gen4 SSD for a low price of just $400 with a special discount coupon. That's just $100 per TB, making it a very good offer during these hard times. The deal is still live, so you can check it out in its dedicated article here if you do not want to miss out. Meanwhile, if you don't have that kind of budget but still wish to buy an SSD for a good price, the 2TB variant of the TeamGroup SSD at $280 its lowest price in over three months. Meanwhile, those seeking 2TB but faster performance can check out Samsung's 990 PRO, which has hit the lowest price also in the last quarter or so, as it's on sale for $370 (purchase links under the specs table down below). Thus, you want a faster drive, get the 990 Pro, or you want more capacity, grab the TeamGroup 4TB linked in the first para. The 990 PRO is a PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD and still one of the fastest drives available today for under $500. Speaking of fast, sequential reads and writes are rated at 7450 MB/s and 6900 MB/s, respectively. The random throughputs for reads and writes are 1400K IOPS and 1550K IOPS, respectively. The 990 PRO is based on Samsung's 7th Gen V-NAND flash, and it too is TLC. It packs 2 gigs of LPDDR4 DRAM cache, which helps the random performance. The endurance rating for this is 1200 TBW (terabytes written), which should be sufficient for most users. The Samsung 990 PRO is compatible with the PlayStation 5, but if you are going to use the 990 PRO on a PC, check out the Samsung Magician app that lets you track your drive's health, update its firmware, customize various settings, and more. The tech specs are given below: Specification TeamGroup T-FORCE G50 2TB Samsung 990 PRO 2TB Interface PCIe 4.0 x4, NVMe 1.4 PCIe Gen 4.0 x4, NVMe 2.0 Form Factor M.2 2280 M.2 2280 Controller InnoGrit Controller Samsung In-house Controller NAND Flash 3D TLC 3D TLC DRAM Cache None (HMB supported) 2GB LPDDR4 Sequential Read (Max) 5,000 MB/s 7,450 MB/s Sequential Write (Max) 4,500 MB/s 6,900 MB/s Random Read (4K) Up to 600,000 IOPS Up to 1,400,000 IOPS Random Write (4K) Up to 700,000 IOPS Up to 1,550,000 IOPS TBW (Endurance) 1,300 TBW 1,200 TBW MTBF 3,000,000 hours 1,500,000 hours Operating Temperature 0°C to 70°C 0°C to 70°C Storage Temperature -40°C to 85°C -40°C to 85°C Shock Resistance 1,500G / 0.5ms 1,500G / 0.5ms Heatsink Patented Graphene Heat Spreader No Get them at the links below: Samsung 990 PRO SSD 2TB (MZ-V9P2T0B/AM): $369.99 (Sold and Shipped by Amazon US) TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 2TB SSD (TM8FFE002T0C129): $279.99 (Sold by TeamGroup, Shipped by Amazon US) Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • If you can't spell a simple word that 2nd graders learn, your entire argument is suspect.
    • And here goes the "Won't someone think of the children" brigade. Get stuffed mate. This has NOTHING to do with making the internet safe. It's about tracking adults, spying on your online activity, and sending the boys around when they don't like something you post. Also, again, parliament have voted TWICE against this, and Starmer is going ahead anyway. THAT is anti-democratic bullsh**. They will use this law to track you, they will use this law to control you, and they will use this law to punish you if they don't like what you do, even if it's legal. And your data? Say bye bye to that. It'll be on the darkweb in weeks. I'm not some rando online. I've been an IT professional for 40 years, many of it in security. I know exactly what this means and what will happen to your data. I do not consent and I will not comply.
    • "...but it may not be Microsoft's fault" seems like a reasonable way to tease what is going on without leaving the user with a false impression that an update is the problem. A title isn't a summery, it is meant to entice the user to read the article. It should not contain a misleading premise; which this title does not. You could maybe complain that the first paragraph should have included that detail. The writing style popularized over 100 years ago in newspapers will cover the most important information as soon as possible with details and nuance added later; the idea being that with each new paragraph you have less of the reader's focus.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      Jocimo earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      suprememobiles48 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Prasann earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Prasann earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      520
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      174
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      81
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!