harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodrigo Kumpera <kump...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: NIO Component improvement
Date Wed, 18 Jan 2006 21:33:16 GMT
I have a few comments to make.

First, don't use Microsoft Word, please. Having this on the wiki would
be wonderful.

Socket and SocketChannel have some very weird strange relationship:
1)Socket and ServerSocket must be implemented in terms of SocketImpl,
as a user can supply a custom SocketImpl as constructor parameter for
both.
2)(Server)SocketChannel uses a service provider interface, SelectorProvider.

This mean to implement this mess, subclasses of SocketImpl,
SocketChannel and ServerSocketChannel must be implemented.

My understanding is that there should be a single class with and
network code, and that one is a SocketImpl subclass. What you do is
have package private methods shared between the implementation os
SocketImpl and SocketChannel.

The same applied to datagram sockets.

Rodrigo

On 1/18/06, Vladimir Strigun <vstrigun@gmail.com> wrote:
> We also have been thinking about implementation of socket channels
> from java.nio package. One of the concerns we had is related to the
> fact that java.nio.channels API provides methods to access regular
> java.net socket classes via corresponding methods of socket channels.
> Since socket implementations are typically located in java.net package
> and have package private visibility one has to create the new socket
> implementations for the java.nio package. Having in mind that the
> functionality for them has many things in common it could make sense
> to share socket implementations between the java.net and java.nio
> packages.
>
> Attached document contains a proposal describing an approach which is
> trying to enforce portability of nio socket channels implementation by
> moving supporting functions up to java layer and by sharing the code
> between java.net's socket implementations and socket channels in
> java.nio package thus reducing the amount of java code and number of
> native methods in both packages.
>
> Thanks,
> Vladimir Strigun, Intel Middleware Products Division.
>
>
> On 1/12/06, Paulex Yang <paulex.yang@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi, everybody
> >
> > I'm Paulex of China Software Development Lab, IBM, and I'm working with
> > Richard on the nio improvement. I found that the network related
> > channels in java.nio.channels are not implemented in the class library
> > code, so I will raise a JIRA request on this today. and we will start to
> > contribute an implementation of these classes. Hopefully they can be
> > accepted and helpful:).
> >
> > P.S. As a declaration, I confirm that:
> > I have read Apache Harmony Contribution Policy and already have a
> > completed questionnaire on file. :-)
> >
> > Richard Liang wrote:
> >
> > > Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> > >
> > >> Defects?  In software?  Can't be :)
> > >>
> > >> Thanks, and welcome.
> > >>
> > >> Please read our comntribution policy :
> > >>
> > >> http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/contribution_policy.html
> > >>
> > >> Please ensure that you will be able to satisfactorily contribute to
> > >> the NIO area
> > >>
> > >> geir
> > >>
> > >> Richard Liang wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi there:
> > >>>
> > >>> Recently, My colleague Paulex and I are looking at the code
> > >>> contributed by IBM (Tim). We spend most of our time on NIO, and find
> > >>> there are some defects in this component. We will submit the defects
> > >>> in Harmony JIRA, and hopefully we can contribute patches to fix
> > >>> these defects.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks a lot.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > > Hello Geir,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your reminder.
> > >
> > > Yes, I have read Apache Harmony Contribution Policy and already have a
> > > completed questionnaire on file.
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Paulex Yang
> > China Software Development Lab
> > IBM
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message