Hi there, The ServerResource class is very lightweight and there is no special penalty in creating a new instance of it for each request. Its memory footprint is small as it contains only those member variables: - context : Context - request : Request - response: Response
- annotated : boolean - conditional: boolean - existing: boolean - negotiated: boolean - variants: Map<Method, Object> We even have a plan to go without the "variants" member variable. "Enhance ServerResource design" http://restlet.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=462 By extending Restlet instead, you will lose automatic content negotiation, conditional processing, automatic conversion between objects and representation and the ability to use annotated methods (@Get, @Put, etc.). You will also have to take care of multi-threading. Best regards, Jerome Louvel -- Restlet ~ Founder and Lead developer ~ http://www.restlet.org Noelios Technologies ~ Co-founder ~ http://www.noelios.com -----Message d'origine----- De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Envoyé : mercredi 26 août 2009 22:35 À : [email protected] Objet : ServerResource I'm evaluating Restlet for my next project and would like clarification on some design desicions. ServerResource is the preferred way to expose resources in Restlet, but is there a penalty to creating a new instance for each request? We will be using Scala and most of the code will follow an immutable/functional style. What are the downsides of just extending the Restlet class for handling requests? Thanks ------------------------------------------------------ http://restlet.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=4447&dsMessageId=23877 17 ------------------------------------------------------ http://restlet.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=4447&dsMessageId=2388195
