Costin Manolache wrote:
Why not make MessageBytes implement CharSeq as well, for consistency ? And
maybe even ByteChunk - we're doing some
(bad) conversions and toString() inside already.
I think it could be useful in some rare cases. This was mostly to be
used on the URL, which goes through many (mandatory) transformations,
and ends up as a CharChunk.
> I don't remember refusing making CharChunk implement CharSequence, at
least
> not recently - I think it would
Yes, you did refuse it.
> be a great idea ! Older versions of tomcat that need pre-1.5 support will
> need to use a branch.
Woops, sorry. I don't think the older branch are going to be able to use
HEAD forever due to the JDK dependencies (a branch can be created right
before my patch).
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
