james-mime4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Address list parser expects unfolded field body. Does that make sense?
Date Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:21:23 GMT
Markus Wiederkehr wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org> wrote:
>> Oleg Kalnichevski wrote:
>>> Markus et al
>>> The address list parser currently chokes on folded field values that are
>>> otherwise perfectly valid. That seems somewhat illogical to me. It really
>>> took me a while to figure out what was wrong with the address list until I
>>> stumbled upon a commend about the parser expecting unfolded fields. The very
>>> cryptic exception message did not really help either.
>>> What is the reason for this restriction? It is because folded values are
>>> difficult to parse with jjtree? Should not we unfold field values
>>> automatically prior to feeding them to the parser?
> As for the reason, I don't know, that was before my time..

And also before mine

>>> Oleg
>> DelegatingFieldParser#parse method does not automatically unfold the field
>> body, which actually seems like a bug to me. What is the expected behavior
>> of this method?
>>>From what I see the unfolding happens in
> AbstractField.parse(ByteSequence, String) at line 155. The call
> hierarchy leads to AbstractField.parse(ByteSequence) and
> MessageBuilder.field(Field)..
> I guess you should use AbstractField.parse(ByteSequence).

That still leaves us with DefaultFieldParser and DelegatingFieldParser 
that produce incorrect results, at least in my opinion.

Are there any objections to changing the behavior of these classes?


> Markus

View raw message