Garrett Rooney wrote: > On 8/3/06, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
