You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@shindig.apache.org by Brian Eaton <be...@google.com> on 2008/05/26 02:23:20 UTC
further griping about HTTP stack
It doesn't look like HttpResponse treats HTTP headers as
case-insensitive. Any objections to adding toLower() calls in the
appropriate places to make that happen?
Re: further griping about HTTP stack
Posted by Brian Eaton <be...@google.com>.
Thanks Paul!
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Paul Lindner <pl...@hi5.com> wrote:
> I just committed a fix that does this.
>
>
> On May 25, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Kevin Brown wrote:
>
>> The current header handling is a bit wonky anyway, because it's entirely
>> too
>> verbose for the exceptional case (multiply defined headers).
>>
>> A simple solution for the case sensitivity would be to use a TreeMap
>> instead
>> of a HashMap and pass String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER as the comparator.
>>
>> On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Brian Eaton <be...@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It doesn't look like HttpResponse treats HTTP headers as
>>> case-insensitive. Any objections to adding toLower() calls in the
>>> appropriate places to make that happen?
>>>
>
> Paul Lindner
> plindner@hi5.com
>
>
>
>
Re: further griping about HTTP stack
Posted by Paul Lindner <pl...@hi5.com>.
I just committed a fix that does this.
On May 25, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Kevin Brown wrote:
> The current header handling is a bit wonky anyway, because it's
> entirely too
> verbose for the exceptional case (multiply defined headers).
>
> A simple solution for the case sensitivity would be to use a TreeMap
> instead
> of a HashMap and pass String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER as the comparator.
>
> On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Brian Eaton <be...@google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> It doesn't look like HttpResponse treats HTTP headers as
>> case-insensitive. Any objections to adding toLower() calls in the
>> appropriate places to make that happen?
>>
Paul Lindner
plindner@hi5.com
Re: further griping about HTTP stack
Posted by Kevin Brown <et...@google.com>.
By the way, this is also in my big ContentFetcher refactoring patch.
Unfortunately I got side tracked halfway through making those changes, and
now it's woefully out of sync with HEAD. I can start applying these changes
again this week though, since I've got a lot of free time other than I/O.
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Kevin Brown <et...@google.com> wrote:
> The current header handling is a bit wonky anyway, because it's entirely
> too verbose for the exceptional case (multiply defined headers).
>
> A simple solution for the case sensitivity would be to use a TreeMap
> instead of a HashMap and pass String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER as the
> comparator.
>
>
> On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Brian Eaton <be...@google.com> wrote:
>
>> It doesn't look like HttpResponse treats HTTP headers as
>> case-insensitive. Any objections to adding toLower() calls in the
>> appropriate places to make that happen?
>>
>
>
Re: further griping about HTTP stack
Posted by Kevin Brown <et...@google.com>.
The current header handling is a bit wonky anyway, because it's entirely too
verbose for the exceptional case (multiply defined headers).
A simple solution for the case sensitivity would be to use a TreeMap instead
of a HashMap and pass String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER as the comparator.
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Brian Eaton <be...@google.com> wrote:
> It doesn't look like HttpResponse treats HTTP headers as
> case-insensitive. Any objections to adding toLower() calls in the
> appropriate places to make that happen?
>