On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 5:26 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > yesterday I reviewed the Service interface and the associated hierarchy. > basically, we have either Acceptors or Connectors. > > From those two interfaces, we derive : > (Acceptors) : NioDatagramAcceptor, AprSocketAcceptor, NioSocketAcceptor, > VmPipeSocketAcceptor > (Connectors) : NioDatagramConnector, AprSocketConnector, NioSocketConnector, > VmPipeSocketConnector plus some extra connectors, SerialConnector and > ProxyConnector > > I don't know why the VmPipeSocketConnector has 'socket' in it, because > AFAIU, it has nothing to do with Socket. I don't know what the > ProxyConnector is good for, but I must admit I didn't checked the code. > Anyone has a clue?
IMHO, just to have uniformity. I can look into ProxyConnector and find something. > > Otherwise, I think we should also add a IoSocketConnector and > IoSocketAcceptor, to cover the whole IO spectrum (if it's possible). > > thoughts ? I feel, we should start simple, by supporting Socket stuff first, build the framework and then on adding Serial, BIO, etc. Not to sacrifice generic nature of framework off-course :) Probably its easier said than done. +1 for adding IoSocketConnector/Acceptor -- thanks ashish
