NehanPathan commented on code in PR #1170:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/1170#discussion_r2303279153


##########
src/Lucene.Net.Replicator/SessionToken.cs:
##########
@@ -112,6 +114,33 @@ public void Serialize(DataOutputStream writer)
             }
         }
 
+        /// <summary>
+        /// Asynchronously serialize the token data for communication between 
server and client.
+        /// </summary>
+        /// <param name="output">The <see cref="Stream"/> to write the token 
data to.</param>
+        /// <param name="cancellationToken">A cancellation token to observe 
while waiting for the flush to complete.</param>
+        /// <returns>A task representing the asynchronous operation.</returns>
+        public async Task SerializeAsync(Stream output, CancellationToken 
cancellationToken = default)
+        {
+            using var writer = new DataOutputStream(output);
+            writer.WriteUTF(Id);

Review Comment:
   @NightOwl888
   ---
   
   I wanted to update you regarding the low-level UTF and integer stream 
methods. I initially tried using `Span<byte>` / `ReadOnlySpan<byte>` to reduce 
allocations and align with BCL-style patterns.
   
   However, this causes compiler issues in the current project setup. The async 
`ReadAsync`/`WriteAsync` overloads with `Span<byte>` / `ReadOnlySpan<byte>` 
cannot be used, producing errors like:
   
   * `No overload for method 'WriteAsync' takes 2 arguments`
   * `Cannot convert from 'Span<byte>' to 'Memory<byte>'`
   * `Feature 'ref and unsafe in async and iterator methods' is not available 
in C# 11.0`
   
   Because of this, I propose we **use `byte[]` for all Read/Write methods**, 
including the UTF methods. This approach is consistent with the existing 
synchronous Read/Write helpers. 
   The **byte\[] approach works perfectly**, all tests have been run, and 
everything functions as expected. We can still include the updated UTF 
exception handling (`EncoderFallbackException` / `DecoderFallbackException`) as 
per BCL conventions.
   
   This ensures compatibility with the current codebase without causing any 
compiler issues.
   
   Any suggestion to solve issue or thoughts on this  byte approach??, and I 
can finalize the changes accordingly.
   
   ---
   
   
   
   
   



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucenenet.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Reply via email to