On 8/31/11 2:17 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: > On 31/08/2011 20:28, Phil Steitz wrote: >> Is 1.x vulnerable to this? > I don't think so. I believe this was the result of my re-factoring.
Good. I vaguely recall similar bugs and some 1.x tests like this. I will check. > The > good news was that I spotted it just by looking at the code with a fresh > set of eyes. Things are a lot easier to follow in 2.x Indeed! I have just started fixing up [performance] and reviewing all of the changes and I can say one thing for sure: the new code is much more fun to work with :) Phil > > Mark > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
