File_Persistent_Stream_Repository question

[Mark Daring <co...@chello.at>]

Shouldnt this lines in File_Persistent_Stream_Repository

    "public synchronized InputStream get( final String key )
    ...
    final ArrayList list = new ArrayList();
    list.add( o );
    list.add( stream );
    m_inputs.put( key, stream );
    ...
    }
    "
look like this

    "public synchronized InputStream get( final String key )
    ...
    final ArrayList list = new ArrayList();
    list.add( o );
    list.add( stream );
    m_inputs.put( key, list);
    ...
    }
    "
Its not clear to me whether theres a greater purpose behind it especially in conjunction with the remove(...)-methode.
The same in put(...) and File_Persistent_Object_Repository.

M

Re: File_Persistent_Stream_Repository question

[Mark Daring <co...@chello.at>]

Yep, I totally agree.

M

----- Original Message -----
From: "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>
To: "James Developers List" <se...@james.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 9:00 PM
Subject: RE: File_Persistent_Stream_Repository question


> Mark,
>
> I believe that you are correct, although it is probably harmless in the
code
> as it would be a re-entrance issue, and we don't permit that for mail
> messages.
>
> The only changes should be the two you specifically noted.  The reason
that
> they would not apply to the Object Repository is that the latter gives you
> an Object, the other gives you a Stream to process.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
>


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

RE: File_Persistent_Stream_Repository question

["Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>]

Mark,

I believe that you are correct, although it is probably harmless in the code
as it would be a re-entrance issue, and we don't permit that for mail
messages.

The only changes should be the two you specifically noted.  The reason that
they would not apply to the Object Repository is that the latter gives you
an Object, the other gives you a Stream to process.

	--- Noel


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