On 2/7/07, Joachim Draeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Robert,
Am Sonntag, den 04.02.2007, 21:47 +0000 schrieb robert burrell donkin:
> this refactoring rearranges the code within each ImapCommand to split
> into distinct encode, process and decode phases.
That makes absolutely sense. IMO it should be even more split up into
distinct class files.
that's the plan but i want to move the code around gradually
I'm not sure if we need "SEDA-fication" and a scheduling processor. At
first it could makes things even more complicated. Maybe there are
possibilities for tuning but I don't know if they are worth the effort.
my figures indicate that i need SEDA but i can see a way to refactor
the existing code so that it can support a spectrum of concurrency
options including the SEDA i need.
But maybe I understand better following your next steps in the sandbox.
IMO having it mina-styled is sufficient. And it would mean following an
existing API.
MINA is SEDA (they just use a different set of names from me)
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
