We are not responsible for weird Java design decisions ;-)
On 30/07/14 18:36, Marc van Grootel wrote:
> Hi Dirk,
>
> Great. What a weird asymmetry though. At least there's a way to call it.
> Thanks.
>
> --Marc
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 6:25 PM, Dirk Kirsten wrote:
>
>> Hello Marc,
>>
>>
Hi Dirk,
Great. What a weird asymmetry though. At least there's a way to call it.
Thanks.
--Marc
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 6:25 PM, Dirk Kirsten wrote:
> Hello Marc,
>
> URLEncoder has no public constructor, URLDecoder has. Using import to
> bind to Java, BaseX tries to create a new instance, w
Hello Marc,
URLEncoder has no public constructor, URLDecoder has. Using import to
bind to Java, BaseX tries to create a new instance, which is not
possible without a constructor. Use declare, i.e.
declare namespace encoder = "java:java.net.URLEncoder";
to access static methods.
Cheers,
Dirk
Hi,
What could be the reason that importing java.net.URLDecoder works as
expected but doing the same with java.net.URLEncoder doesn't.
The following works:
import module namespace decoder = "java.net.URLDecoder";
decoder:decode('foo/bar%20baz')
=> 'foo/bar baz'
This gives a "Could not in
4 matches
Mail list logo
