DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36541>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36541 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-07 18:08 ------- (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > Actually I'd say neither is buggy, since they both implement the spec as it's > written. If that's not what was intended, then as you quoted Craig saying: > "the > language is broken", and the spec needs to be changed. I would agree that neither implementation is buggy -- it is entirely legal for a servlet container to avoid letting an application corrupt its interna data structures. It's too bad that the current Tomcat developers care more about performance than they care about reliability. If you aren't going to change it back to the 4.1 implementation (with synchronization locks around the accesses), please take my name out of the @author tag for org.apache.catalina.session.StandardSession -- this code does *not* represent anything I wish to be associated with. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
