You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@shindig.apache.org by Louis Ryan <lr...@google.com> on 2007/12/15 00:13:23 UTC
Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Hi,
I noticed that the Shindig code is using java.net.URL which has some well
known performance issues in its 'equals' method. I think Shindig can happily
use java.net.URI instead and avoid those performance pitfalls and shield
consumers
Sound reasonable?
-Louis
Re: Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Posted by John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com>.
SHINDIG-1 added, thanks for the recommendation :)
--John
On Dec 14, 2007 9:49 PM, Thomas Dudziak <to...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 14, 2007 9:15 PM, John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Are @apache.org accounts supposed to apply to this tool, or do I need to
> > create a new account? johnh appears to be a valid username, but it's
> > evidently not mine (password mismatch). So I clicked Forgot Password...
> and
> > haven't gotten any notice. Did I just reset someone else's pw? :(
>
> Afaik, Apache provides the project definition within JIRA, but you are
> not automatically registered. Simply register with a user name of your
> choice using the @apache.org account.
>
> cheers,
> Tom
>
Re: Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Posted by Thomas Dudziak <to...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 14, 2007 9:15 PM, John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com> wrote:
> Are @apache.org accounts supposed to apply to this tool, or do I need to
> create a new account? johnh appears to be a valid username, but it's
> evidently not mine (password mismatch). So I clicked Forgot Password... and
> haven't gotten any notice. Did I just reset someone else's pw? :(
Afaik, Apache provides the project definition within JIRA, but you are
not automatically registered. Simply register with a user name of your
choice using the @apache.org account.
cheers,
Tom
Re: Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Posted by John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com>.
Are @apache.org accounts supposed to apply to this tool, or do I need to
create a new account? johnh appears to be a valid username, but it's
evidently not mine (password mismatch). So I clicked Forgot Password... and
haven't gotten any notice. Did I just reset someone else's pw? :(
--John
On Dec 14, 2007 8:28 PM, Thomas Dudziak <to...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 14, 2007 8:19 PM, John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Fashioning the CL now - it'll be in my next commit.
>
> Please also file an issue in Shindig's JIRA
> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG), and note the issue's
> name (most likely SHINDIG-1 :-) ) in the commit comment.
>
> cheers,
> Tom
>
Re: Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Posted by Thomas Dudziak <to...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 14, 2007 8:19 PM, John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com> wrote:
> Fashioning the CL now - it'll be in my next commit.
Please also file an issue in Shindig's JIRA
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG), and note the issue's
name (most likely SHINDIG-1 :-) ) in the commit comment.
cheers,
Tom
Re: Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Posted by John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com>.
Fashioning the CL now - it'll be in my next commit.
Thanks,
John
On Dec 14, 2007 6:04 PM, Cassie <do...@google.com> wrote:
> +1
> do it.
>
> On Dec 14, 2007 5:58 PM, John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Why yes I am, assuming nobody registers an objection reasonably soon.
> >
> > On Dec 14, 2007 5:54 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Are you volunteering? :)
> > >
> > > On Dec 14, 2007 4:56 PM, John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why not just do a bulk change right off the bat? +1 on it being a
> good
> > > > idea.
> > > >
> > > > John
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 14, 2007 4:50 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > It sounds perfectly reasonable to me; We should just change it as
> we
> > > go,
> > > > > though.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Dec 14, 2007 3:13 PM, Louis Ryan <lr...@google.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I noticed that the Shindig code is using java.net.URL which has
> > some
> > > > > well
> > > > > > known performance issues in its 'equals' method. I think Shindig
> > can
> > > > > > happily
> > > > > > use java.net.URI instead and avoid those performance pitfalls
> and
> > > > shield
> > > > > > consumers
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sound reasonable?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Louis
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Posted by Cassie <do...@google.com>.
+1
do it.
On Dec 14, 2007 5:58 PM, John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com> wrote:
> Why yes I am, assuming nobody registers an objection reasonably soon.
>
> On Dec 14, 2007 5:54 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Are you volunteering? :)
> >
> > On Dec 14, 2007 4:56 PM, John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Why not just do a bulk change right off the bat? +1 on it being a good
> > > idea.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > On Dec 14, 2007 4:50 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > It sounds perfectly reasonable to me; We should just change it as we
> > go,
> > > > though.
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 14, 2007 3:13 PM, Louis Ryan <lr...@google.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I noticed that the Shindig code is using java.net.URL which has
> some
> > > > well
> > > > > known performance issues in its 'equals' method. I think Shindig
> can
> > > > > happily
> > > > > use java.net.URI instead and avoid those performance pitfalls and
> > > shield
> > > > > consumers
> > > > >
> > > > > Sound reasonable?
> > > > >
> > > > > -Louis
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Posted by John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com>.
Why yes I am, assuming nobody registers an objection reasonably soon.
On Dec 14, 2007 5:54 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
> Are you volunteering? :)
>
> On Dec 14, 2007 4:56 PM, John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Why not just do a bulk change right off the bat? +1 on it being a good
> > idea.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Dec 14, 2007 4:50 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > > It sounds perfectly reasonable to me; We should just change it as we
> go,
> > > though.
> > >
> > > On Dec 14, 2007 3:13 PM, Louis Ryan <lr...@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I noticed that the Shindig code is using java.net.URL which has some
> > > well
> > > > known performance issues in its 'equals' method. I think Shindig can
> > > > happily
> > > > use java.net.URI instead and avoid those performance pitfalls and
> > shield
> > > > consumers
> > > >
> > > > Sound reasonable?
> > > >
> > > > -Louis
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Posted by Kevin Brown <et...@google.com>.
Are you volunteering? :)
On Dec 14, 2007 4:56 PM, John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com> wrote:
> Why not just do a bulk change right off the bat? +1 on it being a good
> idea.
>
> John
>
> On Dec 14, 2007 4:50 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > It sounds perfectly reasonable to me; We should just change it as we go,
> > though.
> >
> > On Dec 14, 2007 3:13 PM, Louis Ryan <lr...@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I noticed that the Shindig code is using java.net.URL which has some
> > well
> > > known performance issues in its 'equals' method. I think Shindig can
> > > happily
> > > use java.net.URI instead and avoid those performance pitfalls and
> shield
> > > consumers
> > >
> > > Sound reasonable?
> > >
> > > -Louis
> > >
> >
>
Re: Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Posted by John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com>.
Why not just do a bulk change right off the bat? +1 on it being a good idea.
John
On Dec 14, 2007 4:50 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
> It sounds perfectly reasonable to me; We should just change it as we go,
> though.
>
> On Dec 14, 2007 3:13 PM, Louis Ryan <lr...@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I noticed that the Shindig code is using java.net.URL which has some
> well
> > known performance issues in its 'equals' method. I think Shindig can
> > happily
> > use java.net.URI instead and avoid those performance pitfalls and shield
> > consumers
> >
> > Sound reasonable?
> >
> > -Louis
> >
>
Re: Proposal : Use java.net.URI instead of java.net.URL
Posted by Kevin Brown <et...@google.com>.
It sounds perfectly reasonable to me; We should just change it as we go,
though.
On Dec 14, 2007 3:13 PM, Louis Ryan <lr...@google.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that the Shindig code is using java.net.URL which has some well
> known performance issues in its 'equals' method. I think Shindig can
> happily
> use java.net.URI instead and avoid those performance pitfalls and shield
> consumers
>
> Sound reasonable?
>
> -Louis
>