On Tue, 1 Nov 2022 14:47:49 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Actually... Maybe I could move up the paragraph that says that URL
>> constructors are deprecated up here, just after the title? Would
>> that be better?
>
> Try it, it might be better. I think the main thing is that link brings the
On Tue, 1 Nov 2022 14:22:18 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> To be discussed: I actually wanted the deprecation link ( the link from
>> `@deprecated` ) to lead here because I find that the whole section is
>> relevant for developers who might want to decide whether to actually move
>> away from usi
On Tue, 1 Nov 2022 14:10:01 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/URL.java line 133:
>>
>>> 131: * specified. The optional fragment is not inherited.
>>> 132: *
>>> 133: * Constructing instances of
>>> {@code URL}
>>
>> Would it be better to move the anchor to lin
On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 14:24:09 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Daniel Fuchs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains four additional
>> commits
On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 14:17:12 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Daniel Fuchs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains four additional
>> commits
On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 14:16:24 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Daniel Fuchs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains four additional
>> commits
On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 14:14:22 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Daniel Fuchs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains four additional
>> commits
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 22:00:01 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
> Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use java.net.URI to
> parse or construct any URL. ... To construct a URL, using URI::toURL should
> be preferred.
>
> You have jumped through some refactoring hoops to be able to apply
On 1/11/2022 5:52 pm, Alan Bateman wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 22:00:01 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
You have jumped through some refactoring hoops to be able to apply the
deprecation suppression to as little code as possible .. having made such
changes, then why didn't you just make the recommended
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 22:00:01 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
> You have jumped through some refactoring hoops to be able to apply the
> deprecation suppression to as little code as possible .. having made such
> changes, then why didn't you just make the recommended change instead ?
>
> Should I presume
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 14:54:26 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use `java.net.URI`
>> to parse or construct any URL.
>>
>> The `java.net.URL` class does not itself encode or decode any URL components
>> according to the escaping mechanism defin
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 14:54:26 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use `java.net.URI`
>> to parse or construct any URL.
>>
>> The `java.net.URL` class does not itself encode or decode any URL components
>> according to the escaping mechanism defin
On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:51:31 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> I see your point. It may be more appropriate if URI.toURL was designed as
>> URL.fromURL.
>>
>> I was wondering to have application developers a consistent way to get an
>> URL instance. Now there are two methods in different classes U
On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 11:24:32 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> How about `_unused` or `_unused1`, `_unused2` then in the meantime?
>
> I'd be happy to make the change. Let's wait to see if anybody has a better
> naming suggestion.
Hello Daniel, I think calling it `unused` is fine. I did a quick searc
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 14:54:26 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use `java.net.URI`
>> to parse or construct any URL.
>>
>> The `java.net.URL` class does not itself encode or decode any URL components
>> according to the escaping mechanism defin
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 14:54:26 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use `java.net.URI`
>> to parse or construct any URL.
>>
>> The `java.net.URL` class does not itself encode or decode any URL components
>> according to the escaping mechanism defin
> Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use `java.net.URI`
> to parse or construct any URL.
>
> The `java.net.URL` class does not itself encode or decode any URL components
> according to the escaping mechanism defined in RFC2396. It is the
> responsibility of the caller to e
17 matches
Mail list logo
