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=22940.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
This bit defintely needs to be rewritten. Odi, can you take care of it?
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Ortwin Glück [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 09:03
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: NameValuePair.equals
I just came over the code:
public
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=22926.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
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=22969.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
This particular code and the accompaning test predates The Trojan War and the Fall of
Troy. If the test case does not make sense, let's change it as well.
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Ortwin Glück [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 10:14
To: Commons HttpClient
Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote:
This particular code and the accompaning test predates The Trojan War
and the Fall of Troy. If the test case does not make sense, let's
change it as well.
Oleg
*g* It doesn't seem to break anything else apart from that (webapp tests
and external ones run through). The
see attached patch:
removed strict class check from NameValuePair#equals and rewrote code
for better readability. Updated API Doc. Test case changed to the
modified contract.
Index: java/org/apache/commons/httpclient/NameValuePair.java
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=22984.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
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=15435.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Ortwin Glück wrote:
Why is it required that equals returns false if the classes do not
match exactly? I thinks this is a weird behaviour for an equals method
and should clearly be changed.
It's weird behavior, but you have to be careful when changing it to
instanceof. If an equals method
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=15435.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Laura Werner wrote:
It's weird behavior, but you have to be careful when changing it to
instanceof. If an equals method tries to get too clever and suports
equality with other types, you can end up with cases where equals is
not symmetric, e.g. a.equals(b)==true but b.equals(a)==false. The
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=22926.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
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=22926.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
I will write a little something about my ideas behind the
HttpParamsFactory when I get home tonight.
Mike
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Adam R. B. Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oleg wrote:
Adam, with all due respect let me point out that we have stable
HTTPCLIENT_2_0_BRANCH branch that should be used by those who need
API and/or code stability. If GUMP cannot be configured to use any
other CVS branch but
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Adam R. B. Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, most of my statement (and now question) is about
friend-of-gump behaviour, and having that project is good, but not
friendly 'cos it forces work onto sub-projects.
I'm not sure.
Do you not agree that the project should
Stefan wrote:
Please note that there already is a commons-httpclient-2.0-branch
project in Gump's workspace. It would be trivial for projects to
depend on that branch instead of CVS HEAD and in fact jakarta-slide
and xml-rpc already do so.
Thanks, I'd not seen that.
However, most of my
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=22968.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
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=15435.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
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=15435.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
21 matches
Mail list logo