Ok, but I have some tests to run and write up, so maybe not till tomorow
afternoon or monday.

On 16/08/07, Rajith Attapattu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > My comments are more directed at:
> > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/qpid/Message+API+Design,
> which
> > I
> > don't feel is really the low-level protocol 1:1 API.
>
>
> As I pointed out in the previous emails. The API expose everything  except
> for the connection negotiation and failover.
> And have added a few convenience methods for message handling.
> I don't understand what is not low level about it?
> The API has the same level of granularity as the com layer except for
> connection negotiation and failover.
> Do u envision users wanting to do all that?
>
> Yes MessagePartListener exposes more, but not everything. I was hoping to
> > see every method that the broker can call on the client, not just for
> > 'message' but everything.
>
>
> Again I am confused as to what you want. The MessagePartListener exposed
> message content Frame by Frame using the data method ?
> What more do you want? What do mean by not everything? What are these
> methods?
>
> Can you please provide concreate examples? Lets start it from there.
>
> Rupert
> >
> > On 16/08/07, Arnaud Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > It looks to me that the solution you are describing is very similar to
> > > the current common layer (I am not speaking about the API described @
> > > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/qpid/Message+API+Design).
> > > I would help (me at least) if you can highlight the main differences
> > > between the two approaches. What would change, What are the advantages
> > > of using your approach when compare with talking directly to the
> current
> > > common layer?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Arnaud
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 15:46 +0100, Rupert Smith wrote:
> > > > Here is a picture that might help explain my idea more clearly.
> > > >
> > > > 'B' is the broker interface, callable by the client, 'C' is the
> > > > methods the client handles, callable by the broker. Comm layer
> > > > implements both, turning method calls into frames, frames into
> method
> > > > calls. An instance of the comm layer created through its factory,
> will
> > > > be specific to client or broker usage scenario.
> > > >
> > > > The broker routing layer also implements the protocol factory. As it
> > > > is a broker it only supplies the broker interface, if you try and
> gets
> > > > its client interface, it will throw an exception, which is why I put
> a
> > > > line through the 'C'.
> > > >
> > > > As you can see, the client that is talking to the comm layer, could
> > > > just as easily be talking to an in-vm broker.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to