hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Becke <be...@u.washington.edu>
Subject Re: A bug?
Date Tue, 02 Sep 2003 23:14:43 GMT
Sounds reasonable.  I will go ahead and create patch for this.

Thanks,

Mike

On Tuesday, September 2, 2003, at 01:19 AM, Roland Weber wrote:

> Hello Mike,
>
> I think closing the output stream first is the right thing to do.
> Someone might want to send a shutdown notification to the
> server before stopping to receive, e.g. for SSL connections.
>
> regards,
>   Roland
>
>
>
>
>
> Michael Becke <becke@u.washington.edu>
> 01.09.2003 21:16
> Please respond to "Commons HttpClient Project"
>
>         To:     "Commons HttpClient Project"
> <commons-httpclient-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
>         cc:
>         Subject:        Re: A bug?
>
>
> Yes, this is a good point.  We might as well be as thorough as 
> possible.
>
> The only real change that might make sense in reversing the order in
> which streams are closed.  Is sounds like Yue would like to have the
> output stream closed before the input.  Anyone have objections to this?
>
> Mike
>
> On Monday, September 1, 2003, at 07:46 AM, Roland Weber wrote:
>
>> Michael Becke wrote:
>>
>>> Any thoughts on why we close the streams and then the socket?
>>
>> Someone might have implemented sockets with buffered streams.
>> Closing only the socket directly would not dispose of the buffers.
>> Given the SocketFactory stuff, that possibility shouldn't be ruled 
>> out.
>>
>> just my thoughts :-)
>>   Roland
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> commons-httpclient-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> commons-httpclient-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>


Mime
View raw message