directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <>
Subject RE: [MINA] RE: [jira] Commented: (DIRMINA-121) Per-port filter chain
Date Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:48:01 GMT
> From: Irving, Dave []
> Sure - it would be possible to do this without changing the API at the
> code level -  but the ** contract ** changes - which is really part of
> the API.

I was very much amused, when I heard about this ** contract ** :-)
I really thought it was wrong to support caching of NextFilters, first
because you get the correct instance on every call of the filter API and
second because the chain even today is mutable. So even today, if I have
a bunch on connections going and I go and remove a filter from
IoAcceptor, the NextFilter being cached will be broken, for all

> Filter implementors would not be able to cache NextFilters any more:
> if they did, things would break (and you were very worried before
> changes which would make it easier for users to break things). So if
> they upgrade and don't recode their filters accordingly, they've got a
> problem.

Well, as we are in an odd branch (0.9), this is the time to make changes
to the contract, which has change quite a lot, as far as I know. :-)
> That's what I mean by "impact".
> Hopefully Trustin will get back to us with his comments on this
> - then I'll know whether its worth me spending the time to implement
> lazy copy or not.

No worries,

Jose Alberto

View raw message