Hi Jeroen, On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 09:04 +0200, Jeroen Frijters wrote: > Some people (like me) believe it is more important, in some cases, to be > compatible with the reference implementation than to the spec.
Sure, but in this case it isn't really about the spec. It is whether toExternalForm() results in a real usable URL or not. Currently it returns something bogus in some situations. > It's highly unlikely Sun will fix their code, see also: > http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4737160 > http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4110155 > http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4447088 > http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=5014591 > http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=5018803 I looked through these. They are all about the parsing part when given the constructor something that doesn't really follow the spec. I agree that these should just be "liberally" accepted. None of these seem to be about the bug we are now fixing. Cheers, Mark
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Classpath-patches mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches
