On 15/02/2012 16:11, Costin Manolache wrote: > After I submit, I'll give a try to changing SocketWrapper (non-generic, > add read/write), in the git. If you don't like it - easy to drop the branch, > but I think it'll simplify the old connectors enough to compensate for the > extra complexity I'm adding :-)
Sounds good. > Well, UpgradeProtocol has read/write methods, I would drop the streams > ( keep them as separate util classes if someone wants them). > I would also drop the methods reading/writing a single byte, use only > byte[]. I'd love to drop the streams and just use the message based API but the WebSocket protocol design is such that it needs to support streaming to stand any chance of being remotely scalable / efficient given the frankly crazy maximum message size. Maybe after things have bedded in for a while, we'll see which API folks are using and if there is zero demand for the stream based API we can drop that part and simplify the code accordingly. > I think most improvements I can think of involve removing code :-) Those are always my favourite changes. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
