[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Empty DN ("") String Value?
- To: Howard Chu <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: Empty DN ("") String Value?
- From: Jon Roberts <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 11:27:49 -0700
- Cc: Marc Boorshtein <email@example.com>, Michael StrÃder <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <474B97F9.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <email@example.com> <474AB152.firstname.lastname@example.org> <474B90D8.email@example.com> <474B97F9.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050720)
Howard Chu wrote:
Jon Roberts wrote:
Since there is a no-argument constructor DN(), perhaps the original
thinking was that null and the rootDSE "" are synonymous. On the other
hand, the existence of this constructor makes as much sense to me as the
redundant addRDN() and addRDNToFront() methods (ie. none at all). I
suppose *somebody* may want to build a DN instance iteratively, but I
would consider it easier to do so concatenating strings for submission
to the more relevant constructor with argument.
Sounds like someone was making a (perhaps futile) stab at instilling the
concept that DNs are honest-to-god sequences of structured data. A good
goal, at least.
I agree, and as I said I can see where somebody would use that idea. The
pointless constructor and redundant methods are still bad. I would guess
the OpenLDAP C code does not contain many examples of procedures with
different names that do the exact same thing line for line, but I could
This exercise in software archeology underscores a major reason I think
JLDAP is latent: a lot of cruft but nobody of original authorship to
explain or clean it up. As for the rest of us, if nobody touches it
nobody breaks it, so there it sits. My 2c.
Keep putting in your 2c. It obviously needs more feedback from more
people with real operational experience using it.
Absolutely! I've only earned a couple hundred thousand dollars from my
operational experiences with JLDAP. Unfortunately, besides Marc those
many other voices don't speak much about the Java LDAP code anymore,
neither here nor at Novell's mailing JLDAP list. You yourself have said
more about my work in your concise responses over the years than any of
them. Hence, I've become accustomed to living in feedback deficit.
And as for Marc's plan to change the toString() method to return "", I
would have preferred the approach Michael implied where null means an
undefined instance and "" is the RootDSE (an honest-to-god node in the
DSE). I'll have some time, so I'd be happy to clean up the whole class
over the next few weeks if nobody objects (and if my privileges are