On 8/17/07, Maarten Bosteels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/17/07, Trustin Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/17/07, Julien Vermillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > It think the ProtocolDecoder implementer can encapsulate his logic
> > > under some other class if it doesn't want to depend on MINA, but with
> > > ByteBuffer, and all the point Maaarten added (like
> > > ProtocolDecoderOutput) I think it won't be easly doable without
> > > breaking the codec API and sacrifice some of it simplicity.
> >
> > Yeah, you are right.  I forgot the ByteBuffer! :)
> >
> > But the point here is to decouple a codec from IoSession so the codec
> > can be easily adaptable into other application component.  ByteBuffer
> > and ProtocolEncoder/DecoderOutput is very easy to convert as you know
> > because they are very simple, but IoSession is a different beast.
> >
> > We could provide a mock implementation of IoSession, but I guess it
> > will not look nice (i.e. it violates OO principle).
>
> Ok, back to your original suggestion :-)

Good to see you back to the track. :D

> I think it's a really good idea to remove the IoSession from the signature
> of the encoder/decoder.
> Testing encoders/decoders will also be asier since  one won't need a Dummy
> IoSession anymore.

Exactly.  That's why I posted the first message in this thread.  :)
However, I wanted to make sure if there's any special use case I might
have missed.

Hey MINA community, your participation is appreciated!

Thanks in advance,
Trustin
-- 
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6

Reply via email to