Hi Petteri,
Two things. One is that seems 6562614 still doesn't show up in
bugs.sun.com. I guess it's still on its way from our internal bug
database to public one. You could check it later on.
The other is that I encourage you to sign SCA. Then I can incorporate
your code into OpenJDK code
Michael,
>> 1) java.net.URL is discouraged... I would agree with Alan on this.
Fair enough: I shall remove those methods.
Can you confirm you want the naming convention changed to Url? It's just
that everything else in the package uses uppercase URL (for legacy
reasons, I'm sure). Note that t
Richard Kennard wrote:
What we have left appear to be some fairly small details. If I may
summarise, you are saying...
Yes, I think that is true.
1) java.net.URL is discouraged, therefore we shouldn't support it in
our API nor follow its naming convention (even though we'll sit
alongside it
Alan,
Thanks for sticking with me - your comments and support have definitely
improved my code, and I am grateful to you as a result.
I have updated the version at...
https://jdk-collaboration.dev.java.net/servlets/ProjectForumMessageView?messageID=20129&forumID=1463
...to include:
a)
Hi Petteri,
Yes, we'd better to fix this. It is a straightforward one. A new CR,
6562614, has been filed against this. You could check it in bugs.sun.com.
And now I need to figure out how to go through internal process before I
could finally put back the code on your behave. Will keep you pos
