Refactor ETag-related logic for improved readability #33770
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
spring-projects-issues
added
the
status: waiting-for-triage
smartandhandsome
changed the title
checkNotModified logic for improved readability
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
isEligibleForEtagto simplify method signature by removing unnecessary parameters.I noticed that in the
isEligibleForEtagmethod, it is validating the response status code for any successful range (200–299,ShallowEtagHeaderFilter.java> line 151).but in
checkNotModified, it is strictly checking for 200 OK(DefaultServerWebExchange.java> 308 line,ServletWebRequest.java> 210 line). I’m wondering if these conditions should be aligned for consistency. ShouldcheckNotModifiedalso handle a broader range of successful status codes, or is there a reason to limit it to 200 OK?