abdera-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James M Snell <jasn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: FYI, client code
Date Thu, 03 Aug 2006 18:06:37 GMT
Garrett Rooney wrote:
> On 8/3/06, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Just a heads up... Next week I'll be checking in a new module that
>> provides an APP client API.  Right now, the module is a fairly thin
>> wrapper on top of the commons http client, but adds a client-side HTTP
>> cache and easier support for conditional operations.
> Any reason you haven't been developing this in the tree, as opposed to
> dropping a mostly completed module on us?  Seeing the development of
> such things is useful, as it's often easier to digest code
> incrementally as opposed to having to start from the completed
> version...

Mainly because the code is currently embarrassingly sloppy and I really
just started working on it in earnest yesterday morning.

>> For example,
>>   // prepare the request
>>   Client client = ClientFactory.INSTANCE.newClient();
>>   ClientRequestContext rc =
>>     client.createRequestContext(
>>       "GET","http://www.snellspace.com/wp/wp-atom1.php");
> Yet another factory?  Is that really necessary?

Likely not. There are two motivations: 1. allow for other underlying
client stack impls (e.g. something other than commons httpclient) and 2.
align with the model used by the rest of Abdera.  We likely should take
a look at the model used across the entire code and see if a better
approach can be applied across the board.

>>   // execute the request
>>   ClientResponseContext resp =
>>     (ClientResponseContext) client.process(rc);
>>   // check the status
>>   System.out.println(resp.getStatus());
>>   // a second request will pull the response from the client cache
>>   // Cache-Control directives are respected. Stale cached responses are
>>   // revalidated.
>>   resp = (ClientResponseContext) client.process(rc);
>>   System.out.println(resp.getStatus());
>> There are still lots of little issues to work out, such as whether or
>> not to buffer the InputStream coming from the commons HttpClient so that
>> the connection can be released, but, for the most part, I've got the
>> client code working.
> Again, it seems like this kind of thing could be "worked out" in the
> repos and on this list, unless that's what you mean and I'm
> missunderstanding...

Yeah, that's what I'm meaning.  The code I check in will be minimally
functional (just enough so that it appears to work) and will need quite
a bit more work.

- James

View raw message