Ilya Kasnacheev wrote (2008-03-12 12:18):
At least it is predictable. Sending new HTTP headers in the middle of
the response may in theory be interpreted differently by different clients.
В сообщении от 12 Март 2008 12:07 Mattias Jiderhamn написал(a):
There would not be a forward on the original request, EXCEPT if there is an
What about my anonymous wrapper? See reply to original post.
It may work if you are certain there will be no flushing to the client
before a forward().
Nope, there would be a lot of flushing before forward().
Because, forward() final destination isn't going to print page from
scratch. Instead it is going to print a fragment of page to be
include()d. After it will return, the rest of page() will be printed.
Also, there can be quite a few such (include() -> forward() -> forward()
-> print()) sessions.
What I meant was whether there will under any circumstances be a forward
on the original - non-dispatched - request. (Such as displaying an error
page if an error occurs deep within the include hierarchy)
Then again, throwing a lot of InvalidState errors because error occured after
buffer was committed is, IMHO, seriously *not smart* move.
resin-interest mailing list