On 11/20/05, Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Author: costin > > Date: Sun Nov 20 10:19:56 2005 > > New Revision: 345767 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=345767&view=rev > > Log: > > Remove even more dups. It seems the apr and non-apr were not actually in > > sync, there are at least 2 places where extra SecurityManager magic was > > used in non-apr. > > > > Modified: > > tomcat/sandbox/java/org/apache/coyote/http11/Http11AprProcessor.java > > tomcat/sandbox/java/org/apache/coyote/http11/Http11Processor.java > > tomcat/sandbox/java/org/apache/coyote/http11/InternalAprInputBuffer.java > > tomcat/sandbox/java/org/apache/coyote/http11/InternalInputBuffer.java > > I am not going to bother tetsing this stuff. As you may have noticed, > many of the algorithms used behaves in subtly different ways. The result > of the merge is of course going to be exponentially more difficult to > maintain (and, obviously, I am not going to be the one doing it). Why > not removing APR support instead since you (and all the other members of > the community, it seems) don't like it ?
I didn't say I don't like it - I like having APR support very much, and I like APR more than I like NIO. I don't like 'alghoritms that behave in sublty different ways', or duplicating extremely complex classes just for 3-4 lines of code that is different. I know it is simpler to write and probably maintain the code ( for people who wrote it ), but not easier to understand for me. In any case - it's sandbox. People can try things in sandbox - many may not work. Think of this as a way for me to understand those subtle alghoritms by seeing what is really different. Costin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
