Costin Manolache wrote:
Well, long time ago CharChunk and ByteChunk were supposed to be just an
implementation
detail of MessageBytes - which was supposed to hide the detail of chars and
bytes and avoid the strings.
But they were supposed to work together, and stay kind of consistent.
I am not
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 7:21 AM
To: tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: svn commit: r376730 -
/tomcat/connectors/trunk/util/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/buf/
CharChunk.java
Author: remm
Date: Fri
Bill Barker wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=376730view=rev
Log:
- Have CharCHunk implement CharSequence, so that a CharChunk
can be given to a Java 5 regexp matcher
without having to do a useless toString on it first.
Typically,
I don't remember refusing making CharChunk implement CharSequence, at least
not recently - I think it would
be a great idea ! Older versions of tomcat that need pre-1.5 support will
need to use a branch.
Costin
On 2/10/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: remm
Date: Fri Feb
Why not make MessageBytes implement CharSeq as well, for consistency ? And
maybe even ByteChunk - we're doing some
(bad) conversions and toString() inside already.
Costin
On 2/10/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: remm
Date: Fri Feb 10 07:20:44 2006
New Revision: 376730
On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 03:19:58PM -0800, 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.
Please don't! It's already a PITA to get character conversions
On 2/10/06, Remy Maucherat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
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.
