On Thursday 03 January 2008 15:56, Florent Daignière wrote:
> * Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-01-03 15:25:55]:
> 
> > On Saturday 29 December 2007 13:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Author: nextgens
> > > Date: 2007-12-29 13:34:33 +0000 (Sat, 29 Dec 2007)
> > > New Revision: 16839
> > > 
> > > Modified:
> > >    trunk/freenet/src/freenet/node/FNPPacketMangler.java
> > > Log:
> > > jfk: Fix the issue spotted by robert (see 
> > 
http://archives.freenetproject.org/message/20071229.105331.b1a491f0.en.html)
> > > 
> > > That might solve the "I've lost the exponential" problem
> > 
> > It might? Wouldn't the old code cause an NPE?
> 
> Well that's a fix-of-a-fix-of-a-fix, so yes, I won't dare saying it
> will fix it.
> 
> No it wouldn't cause an npe... because of the way we instanciate the
> class... but it's a good practice to check for null there.
> 
> If it was causing NPEs we would have spotted it earlier ;)

Which is why I'm not convinced the == null matters. But the comparing against 
the right thing does matter.
> 
> NextGen$
> 

Attachment: pgpqKjJP47jHO.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to