hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Expect-continue doesn't seem operative using 4.3.x builder structures
Date Thu, 22 May 2014 12:40:02 GMT
On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 08:27 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
> Let me clarify.  Right now, you've a wrapper hierarchy that is totally
> distinct from the original request hierarchy.  You *could* allow everything
> wrapped with HttpRequestWrapper to allow expect/continue, in which case you
> lose the ability to have specificity for different kinds of wrapped
> requests.  Or (much better) you could have all HttpRequest objects have a
> "supportExpectContinue" method, which in the wrapper would wind up calling
> the embedded request's supportExpectContinue method.  Seems much better, no?
> 

Why is exactly instanceof bad or less flexible? It enables certain
requests to provide optional behavior such as ability to enclose a
request entity, which by the current official HTTP spec applies to POST
and PUT _only_.

So, what is better, round or green? 

Oleg

> Karl
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Karl Wright <daddywri@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > >>>>>>
> > Are you sure about that? What would this method do for GET requests
> > given than those requests are not even supposed to enclose an entity?
> > <<<<<<
> >
> > It would return false for any request implementation that did not support
> > expect-continue, of course.
> > The advantage of this kind of structure is that it does not rely on the
> > implicit instanceof operator, but rather an explicit method implementation,
> > so it is clearer (and more flexible).
> >
> > Karl
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org>wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 07:55 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
> >> > FWIW, a better way for this kind of thing to be done would be for the
> >> > request object to have a method, e.g. "supportsExpectContinue()", that
> >> you
> >> > would call, instead of relying on class names and hierarchy ...
> >> >
> >>
> >> Are you sure about that? What would this method do for GET requests
> >> given than those requests are not even supposed to enclose an entity?
> >>
> >> Oleg
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@hc.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@hc.apache.org


Mime
View raw message