On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Keith Wannamaker wrote:
> Hi Costin,
>
> Oh, no, not at all, I understand now.
>
> However, what do you think about keeping the old String
> methods for compatibility with 3.2 interceptors?
> Something like:
:-)
All I can think at this moment is "how stupid I was
when I did
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 11:16 AM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Re: TC 3.3 >= m3 Request.setRequestUri
|
|
| Hi Keith,
|
| After String->MessageByte, instead of storing the request
| info as
Hi Keith,
After String->MessageByte, instead of storing the request
info as String, with getFoo/setFoo methods, we use
a MessageBytes - which is a modifiable object.
The equivalent of getFoo is now to get the MessageBytes and
call toString(), and the equivalent of setFoo is setString()
on the me
