Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> it's really about objectives and aims rather than technical designs
> i wonder whether it's worthwhile having what's probably going to be a
> long technical discussion about a design for a unified parser for both
> streams and non-streams. if no one else really feels strongly about
> non-streaming implementations then it's probably best for me to drop
> this goal, revert the changes i've made to allow support for efficient
> non-streaming and let jochen optimize mime4j just for streams.
I agree with you: let's talk about use cases before detailed design. As
Serge asked, what are the use cases for both? What are the trade-offs in
choosing to support or limit the exposed functionality?
Please note: I may not be responding until Sunday evening.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
