> > My guess was that this was added to java.net.InetAddress to mask any > > incompatibilities between operating systems in this regard. > > That's possibly true, but that doesn't excuse an incorrect > implementation; a cache that doesn't obey the expiration times is > wrong. Agreed. Router caches can be a huge pain in the ass...this would create a similar problem. -- Daniel Rall ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
- java.net: Classpath vs. libgcj Comparison Aaron M. Renn
- Re: java.net: Classpath vs. libgcj Comparison Bryce McKinlay
- Re: java.net: Classpath vs. libgcj Comparison Matt Welsh
- RE: java.net: Classpath vs. libgcj Comparison gs
- Re: java.net: Classpath vs. libgcj Comparison Andrew Haley
- Re: java.net: Classpath vs. libgcj Comparison Daniel L. Rall
- Re: java.net: Classpath vs. libgcj Comparison Bryce McKinlay
- Re: java.net: Classpath vs. libgcj Comparison Aaron M. Renn
- RE: java.net: Classpath vs. libgcj Comparison Gaute Smaaland
- Re: java.net: Classpath vs. libgcj Comparison Bryce McKinlay

