> From: Daniel Rall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>
> "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I personally think that Context should accept null values
> and keys and not
> > throw exceptions, but that's just me. If you want to store
> a null, great.
> > Context will give it back when you ask for it :)
> >
> > It's not a Hashtable. It uses a Hashtable. It acts like a
> hashtable. But
> > it's not a hashtable.
>
> Null values are your friend. I'm not sure of the value of
> null keys, however.
>
I would agree with you that it would make sense to differentiate
between A variable in the Context that happens to be NULL and
an trying to access an undeclared variable. The former is a perfectly
valid situation, the later looks like a template misused to me.
Notice that the fact that we cannot store null values in the Context
is due to the fact that we use a java.util.Hashtable in its implementation.
If we used instead a java.util.HashMap we could store NULL values.
Moreover, HashMap access is not syncronized, which given our usage
of Context is unnecessary. That could even speed things up.
Jose Alberto
