On 26/08/11 17:19, Markus KARG wrote:
>> Markus, Sergey: I have reintroduced the target.request(), you didn't
>> like. However I tried to do it in a way that does
>> not bring any extra method into the invocation chain. Instead of:
>>
>> client.target().accept("text/plain").get();
>>
>> You can now write:
>>
>> client.target().request("text/plain").get();
>
> Actually I do not see why it is necessary to *rename* the method. Obviously it still is used to pass in the accept header, so why not still name it accept, independent of what it actually does or produce?
>
how does it work now for post() with Congtent-Type ?
Sergey
>> In the fluent interface I prefer async().put() over putAsync() or
>> asyncPut().
>
> Me, too.
>
> Regards
>
>
--
Sergey Beryozkin
http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com
Talend - http://www.talend.com