I don't think adding the callback pattern to SCAClient is good idea. IMO,
the client should be really lightweight and supporting incoming connections
is too much in such environment.
Why don't you use an SCA composite/component if callback is required?
Thanks,
Raymond
--------------------------------------------------
From: "ant elder" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2009 11:58 PM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SCAClient API spec proposal
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 10:47 PM, ant elder<[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Mark Combellack<[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi,
I am planning to put this on the agenda for the SCA-J call on Monday
29th of
June. If anyone has any additional feedback, it would be great to hear
it
before then so we can consider it too when looking into this issue.
Thanks,
Mark
Ok, it would make the API simpler to use if the domain uri could be
passed in as a String instead of a URI, so users can just do:
SCAClientFactory.newInstance("SomeDomainURI")
instead of:
SCAClientFactory.newInstance(URI.create("SomeDomainURI"))
...ant
Another would be to support services with bidirectional interfaces.
Thats one of the interesting features of SCA so its a shame the
current client doesn't support them. One way to do that could be by
adding an additional getService method to the SCAClient which includes
a callback handler parameter:
<T> T getService(Class<T> interface, String serviceURI, Object
callbackHandler)
where the callbackHandler object must implement the service's callback
interface, and the SCAClient impl handles running any listeners and
threads that are be needed to support that. Might also need to add a
close() method to SCAClient as well to stop the listeners.
...ant
