At least both values are checked the same way:
public boolean apply( Pointer<V> input )
{
return !input.isFree() && input.isExpired();
}
And I guess "Pointer::isExpired" is implemented in the wrong way to
get both into account:
public boolean isExpired()
{
if ( expires > 0 || expiresIn > 0 )
{
return ( expiresIn + created < currentTimeMillis() );
}
return false;
}
The general idea sound good to me but maybe we could find better
names :-) They're not really selfspeaking from my understanding.
Am 26.12.2012 15:13, schrieb Raffaele P. Guidi:
> The idea was: expiresIn 3 minutes (a time lapse) vs expires tomorrow 08:00
> (an absolute value). Not sure it actually makes sense anymore.
>
> Ciao,
> R
> Il giorno 26/dic/2012 14:50, "Christoph Engelbert" <[email protected]>
> ha scritto:
>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> I'm started documenting some of the missing interfaces / methods but
>> I stuck at all that fuzzy kinds of "expiresIn" and "expires". The
>> only thing about the last one is "-1" or
>> "AbstractMemoryManager::NEVER_EXPIRES" which is 0. So it seems that
>> keys never will expire at all. Did I missed something do we need
>> that second "expires"?
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
