Re: [Fwd: [Issue 53] AttributeHolder needs maps with parameterized types <T>]
Hi Alexey,
Oleksiy Stashok wrote:
> Hi,
>
> IMHO this bug should be closed.
> Don't think we really need this extension to apply to our
> AttributeHolder implementation.
> As attributes are used both inside Grizzly framework and outside, by
> developers, it's difficult to make any assumptions about possible
> parameter types.
>
> What do you think?
I agree :-)
-- Jeanfrancoid
>
> Thanks.
>
> WBR,
> Alexey.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject:
> [Issue 53] AttributeHolder needs maps with parameterized types <T>
> From:
> jfarcand_at_dev.java.net
> Date:
> Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:28:23 +0000
> To:
> issues_at_grizzly.dev.java.net
>
> To:
> issues_at_grizzly.dev.java.net
>
>
> https://grizzly.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53
>
>
>
> User jfarcand changed the following:
>
> What |Old value |New value
> ================================================================================
> Priority|P1 |P3
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> ------- Additional comments from jfarcand_at_dev.java.net Thu Feb 14 22:28:23 +0000 2008 -------
> Not a p1 IMO
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe_at_grizzly.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help_at_grizzly.dev.java.net
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_grizzly.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_grizzly.dev.java.net