tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Costin Manolache" <cos...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Bug in B2C converter WAS: svn commit: r568307 - /tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/buf/B2CConverter.java
Date Tue, 04 Mar 2008 05:21:53 GMT
On 3/3/08, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists <devlists@hanik.com> wrote:
> Costin Manolache wrote:
>  > On 3/3/08, Remy Maucherat <remm@apache.org> wrote:
>  >
>  >> On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 15:58 -0700, Filip Hanik - Dev Lists wrote:
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>> Remy Maucherat wrote:
>  >>>
>  >>>> This problem is a small detail. Much more should be done if you want
>  >>>>
>  >> to
>  >>
>  >>>> do a refactoring: both the mark functionality and readLine need to
>  >>>>
>  >> have
>  >>
>  >>>> direct access to the buffer to be able to be coded in a sane way (and
>  >>>>
>  >> be
>  >>
>  >>>> more efficient too).
>  >>>>
>  >>>>
>  >>> yes, so the question is for 6.0.x and 5.5.x, do we wanna proceed down
>  >>> the refactor route?
>  >>> I was against it in the beginning for the fear of regression. I
>  >>> personally think the whole bytechunk/charchunk thing is very complex,
>  >>> and can be done easier, but that is something I would play around in
>  >>> sandbox, and eventually bring into trunk if it was working.
>  >>>
>  >> I am not really interested in participating. Besides some possible
>  >> simple cleanup, CharChunk is actually too simple rather than too complex
>  >> (ByteChunk is just fine, and doesn't need additional features): to
>  >> improve, it would need to get mark capabilities and (unfortunately) get
>  >> a readLine (it's even more problematic to implement it outside the
>  >> class). I am pretty sure using the NIO buffers will be proposed for some
>  >> reason, which are horrible to use as far as I am concerned.
>  >>
>  >
>  > I think the byte->char conversion should be cleaned, the InputStream hack
>  > was
>  > needed 9 years ago because regular conversion sucked and we couldn't use
>  > the
>  > convertors directly. I've seen quite a few other projects doing the
>  > conversion
>  > themself at least for UTF8 and 8859-1.
>  >
>
> no one disagrees with that. It's just that 5.5.x and 6.0.x is not the
>  place for that cleanup.

Sorry, I didn't mean for 5.5.x or 6.0.x, but for whatever is next.

Maybe making coyote more independent would make some sense ?


Costin


>
> > Regarding using NIO buffers - I agree with Remy,  the flip()s are horrible,
>  > I think
>  > there is a version in sandbox that replaces byte[] with the ByteBuffers, and
>  > it doesn't
>  > seem to be worth it.
>  > However I think it would be just great to start making a distinction between
>  > 'buffer' and
>  > 'pointer to a buffer' - IMO that's the main cause of complexity.
>
> absolutely.
>
> > And maybe
>  > add
>  > 'implements CharSequence, Appendable' to make the coyote classes more
>  > friendly for
>  > direct use.
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >> for 6.0.x and 5.5.x, I'd rather keep the fixes to the actual bug fix to
>  >>
>  >>> maintain stability
>  >>>
>  >> There's no way this sort of work could be good for these branches.
>  >>
>  >
>  > Since I'm quite out of sync - what is the current 'dev branch' and is there
>  > any
>  > 'some API changes allowed' release planned ?
>  > Costin
>  >
>  >
>  > Rémy
>  >
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
>  >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  >>
>  >> No virus found in this incoming message.
>  >> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>  >> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.3/1307 - Release Date: 3/2/2008 3:59
PM
>
> >>
>
>
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
>  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>
Mime
View raw message