> Instead of an XmlRpcClientContext class, I would instead suggest
> writing an XmlRpcTransport interface that is then implemented by each
> of our HTTPTransport classes:
>
> public interface XmlRpcTransport() {
>
> public InputStream executeRequest(URL url, byte[] requestBody);
>
> }
I like it. Done.
I'm also going to add a FixedInputStream class that wraps an
InputStream and returns -1 for read() past a length specified in the
constructor. This allows exceptions to work properly (instead of
blocking indefinitely on the socket read()).
> XmlRpcClient would then get a new method:
>
> public void setTransport(XmlRpcTransport transport)
The version I am working on at the moment has an XmlRpcTransportFactory
responsible for creating XmlRpcTransport instances. You can create an
XmlRpcClient using any of the usual constructors, in which case you get
the default transport factory. You can also specify a transport factory
to one of the constructors.
The XmlRpcClient will call its transport factory for each XML-RPC
made via
execute(String, Vector) and
execute(XmlRpcRequest)
this will create a connection for each XML-RPC made. If you call
execute(XmlRpcRequest, XmlRpcTransport)
then your specified transport will be used instead.
If you want to use a persistent connection, you can use an
XmlRpcTransport from somewhere else (probably an external factory),
and pass this into the execute method on the client yourself.
Andrew.
