Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 55286 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2010 01:45:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 12 Jan 2010 01:45:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 45067 invoked by uid 500); 12 Jan 2010 01:45:47 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-dev-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 44939 invoked by uid 500); 12 Jan 2010 01:45:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 44928 invoked by uid 99); 12 Jan 2010 01:45:46 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:45:46 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of knst.kolinko@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.211 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.211] (HELO mail-fx0-f211.google.com) (209.85.220.211) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:45:38 +0000 Received: by fxm3 with SMTP id 3so12063762fxm.24 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:45:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=mqsvvC8Uxy/qG77nONURIZuAvdW4kcrJjVAUkb/Q4/g=; b=k2Q9GjX/YhNjP6xihzUuRzIlGJoFe3ff3pdqzyn5mfEEtNlsDPdigKox1Pkhs3yzz3 WOlHvPxrVJhbtEW24zDyyiuf+W+V7mFudERspCGZ8+/uvdDL2nT1Y2ZdbOGHgH72xJPR dGyCDFQZlcH3YKpmvF/NumW6CeprBREUu9fFw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Ab5+IuH8qp8j6vSESmuxummBKcihpTul0EuJYrg9nhF3lDGktDHqf3OE/sDtFpv++c SvQVQH8qgIoBvJhFk995EDDr3UHRxV+EyzGBPm10KCLaZsDeVdwenySeUXiIOo4VQ9cb e+TkqA51IF3b8NAem4+vH70vYGa6/Yo7S5uHA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.103.76.22 with SMTP id d22mr7009613mul.79.1263260718090; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:45:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20100112001047.0C9722388901@eris.apache.org> References: <20100112001047.0C9722388901@eris.apache.org> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 04:45:17 +0300 Message-ID: <427155181001111745s57cbceb6x819b861266a9b01d@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: svn commit: r898126 - /tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/jasper/compiler/JspDocumentParser.java From: Konstantin Kolinko To: Tomcat Developers List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org 2010/1/12 : > Author: markt > Date: Tue Jan 12 00:10:46 2010 > New Revision: 898126 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=3D898126&view=3Drev > Log: > Fix https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D47977 > Using a body with tags specified to have empty body content should cause = an error > > Modified: > =A0 =A0tomcat/trunk/java/org/apache/jasper/compiler/JspDocumentParser.jav= a > > @@ -426,9 +430,10 @@ > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 if (scriptlessBodyNode =3D=3D null > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 && bodyType.equalsIgnoreC= ase(TagInfo.BODY_CONTENT_SCRIPTLESS)) { > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 scriptlessBodyNode =3D node; > - =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0} > - =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0else if (TagInfo.BODY_CONTENT_TAG_DEPEND= ENT.equalsIgnoreCase(bodyType)) { > + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0} else if (TagInfo.BODY_CONTENT_TAG_DEPE= NDENT.equalsIgnoreCase(bodyType)) { > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 tagDependentPending =3D true; > + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0} else if (TagInfo.BODY_CONTENT_EMPTY.eq= uals(bodyType)) { > + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0tagEmptyBody =3D node; > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 } > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 } > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 } Why there is equalsIgnoreCase() in the old code? Did the specification ever allow wrong-cased values there? If yes, then maybe the added clause should also use equalsIgnoreCase. Best regards, Konstantin Kolinko --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org