Costin Manolache wrote:
On 10/23/05, Remy Maucherat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm thinking more as an 'uses' - you create ByteBuffers ( maybe direct
buffers ), and
you set it in the ByteChunk. Extend is not the best choice - it
would be hard to work with direct ( or other ) buffers. I'm
On 10/23/05, Remy Maucherat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm thinking more as an 'uses' - you create ByteBuffers ( maybe direct
buffers ), and
you set it in the ByteChunk. Extend is not the best choice - it
would be hard to work with direct ( or other ) buffers. I'm actually
thinking about
Costin Manolache wrote:
Thanks !
I'll add few things I've worked on in the past - if people don't mind,
I'll create a sandbox/java and put everything in one tree, ant and
IDEs are smart enough to exclude/include different packages.
Let me know if any of this seems wrong:
- a smaller
On 10/21/05, Remy Maucherat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Thanks !
I'll add few things I've worked on in the past - if people don't mind,
I'll create a sandbox/java and put everything in one tree, ant and
IDEs are smart enough to exclude/include different packages.
Thanks !
I'll add few things I've worked on in the past - if people don't mind,
I'll create a sandbox/java and put everything in one tree, ant and
IDEs are smart enough to exclude/include different packages.
Let me know if any of this seems wrong:
- a smaller commons-logging impl, without any
