Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" <dev@tomcat.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of funkman@joedog.org designates
 204.74.20.252 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <497DA8CF.1040608@joedog.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 07:13:03 -0500
From: Tim Funk <funkman@joedog.org>
Organization: Human Being
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tomcat Developers List <dev@tomcat.apache.org>
Subject: Re: View towards refactoring changes?
References: <497D69F6.90804@mustardgrain.com>
In-Reply-To: <497D69F6.90804@mustardgrain.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

IIRC - there was talk of this over a year ago. In think in the context 
of that talk APR also had some duplication too and was "in scope" for 
the merge.

But the dev list archives has more details and the conclusion.

-Tim

Kirk True wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> There are a number of places in NioEndpoint and JIoEndpoint that share a 
> good portion of common code. The accessors for common properties take up 
> a good chunk, but there's also some boilerplate code for checking if 
> we're paused, running, etc. There are a lot of places where variable and 
> method scope could be cleaned up too.
> 
> Obviously I can't commit this code myself, but if I submitted patches 
> for it, would they be looked upon favorably or ignored as noise? :)


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