mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niklas Therning <nik...@trillian.se>
Subject Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Date Tue, 18 Sep 2007 07:44:22 GMT
Trustin Lee wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> ByteBuffer.  Do we need renaming?  I didn't have much difficulties
> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> time.
>
> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> think it's the best name available for us.  I think DataBuffer,
> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> candidate.  There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> directly.
>
> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one.  Please
> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> find out the best alternative.
>
> Trustin
>   
Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I think
the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.

Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):

"Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term byte
might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
almost exclusively use octet."

Also

"In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means byte"

This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)

-- 
Niklas Therning
www.spamdrain.net


Mime
View raw message