DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14970>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14970 Passing null for Stack[Keyed]ObjectPool factory causes NullPointerException [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED Summary|Passing null for factory |Passing null for |causes NullPointerException |Stack[Keyed]ObjectPool | |factory causes | |NullPointerException ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2002-11-30 09:16 ------- Some of the more recent changes to Stack[Keyed]ObjectPool incorrectly assume _factory is never null. I've corrected those and added unit tests (to TestStack [Keyed]ObjectPool) to help protect us from similar changes in the future. I agree that there are really two issues here. Can we split the first into a new enhancment "issue" (or even better IMO, open a thread on commons-dev to discuss it). For the second, although I may have mentioned this ability on the dev list, I'm unable to find any documentation that actually describes the ability to set the factory to null, and/or use returnObject to prepopulate the pool. StackObjectPool and StackKeyedObjectPool once again support this functionality. I'm not sure if GenericObjectPool ever did. I think I'm going to mark this bug as FIXED over the StackObjectPool case, and request we split any remaining issues into distinct bugzilla entries. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
