gonzalo diethelm wrote: >> If you change the code to always use "env->GetStringUTFLength > (optval);" >> then from your java code you can do "animals.mammals\u0000" for > precise >> match or "animals.mammals" for "wildcard" matching. Keeps things > simple >> since there is no need for passing length which is a bit more error > prone >> and so un-java :-) > > I agree it is not very Java-ish. On the other hand, it looks closer to > the original C implementation, so there might be fewer surprises this > way. > > I would like input on this from other members in the list.
As far as I understand the Java string object contains the length. Thus supplying the length as second parameter is superfluous IMO. Martin _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
