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=25048>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25048 Missing assignment operator in util/KeyValuePair [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |INVALID ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-01-06 21:05 ------- Seems to me like the current behaviour is more correct: We never documented any support for the = operator in this class, so code should not have been written to rely on any behaviour with the = operator in that class exactly because the class's implementation could change to invalidate that code. You're exactly right that XMemory's addition could have changed the compiler- provided behaviour of = on many classes; I don't think there's any appetite among the developers to go through every class and think about what behaviour for = compilers might have provided. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
