xml-rpc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Redman <...@ergotech.com>
Subject Re: Dictionary vs. Hashtable in XmlRpc.java
Date Fri, 07 Jun 2002 12:28:02 GMT
The jar is also 250K.  After we've hit our application with the Ant 
"GenJar" task, that's about the size of the typical application  - so 
it would double the download time.

The license didn't seem to specifically limit pulling out certain 
classes but I wouldn't want to be the final judge of whether that is 
legally or technically feasible.

I'm still not opposed to the change if we can resolve the issues.  We 
have had applications that have exceed Netscape's memory allocation and 
we could always use more speed.

Jim

On 2002.06.06 22:07 Tim Peierls wrote:
> Tim Peierls wrote:
> > > There is a 1.1 collections compatibility jar from Sun. Would
> > > that do the trick for your 1.1 user base?
> 
> Jim Redman wrote:
> > I can't find the jar to download, nor the license, but in priciple I
> > have no objections. ... And I'm definitly not opposed to performance
> > improvements.
> 
> The README is in
> 
> http://java.sun.com/products/javabeans/infobus/collectionsreadme.html
> 
> and the download (zip, not jar) is via a link from
> 
> http://java.sun.com/products/javabeans/infobus/index.html
> 
> But right away there's a problem: Collections classes in
> the 1.1 port have been repackaged in com.sun.java.util.collections.
> To use this with the org.apache.xmlrpc code would require some
> fancy Antwork (to build a special 1.1 version of the xml-rpc
> client jar). But it could be done.
> 
> --tim
> 

-- 

Jim Redman
(505) 662 5156
http://www.ergotech.com

Mime
View raw message