tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher K.St.John <>
Subject Re: [PATCH] MinimalTomcat, Coupling, Bugs 6669, 6670
Date Tue, 26 Feb 2002 02:13:42 GMT
Remy Maucherat wrote:
> Well, it's not that I want to advocate the "competition", but it seems to me
> that Tomcat 3 is more useful for a "MiniTomcat", mainly because it requires
> only JDK 1.1 (smaller JDK; J2ME is based on JDK 1.1, so maybe it could end
> up being a "target"; that was one of Costin's pet projects, actually).

 For my purposes, it's ok to assume 1.2, so that's not
an issue. 

 If Tomcat 4 isn't meant to be used like I'm using it,
then I don't really understand the point of the generic
interfaces in o.a.catalina. If StandardContext is the
only possible Context implementation, what's the
justification for a generic Context interface?

 The current architecture requires an awful lot of
casts, and if the only configuration allowed is:


 then most of them are unnessary. What's the point
of going through hoops with the generic interfaces
if you know the exact types in advance?

 I understand that project goals can change, but the
design of the apis (not to mention the javadocs)
do seem to strongly imply that something like MinimalTomcat
should be legit.

Christopher St. John

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message