Well, anyway the lifecycle should be well-defined, and I doubt that it currently is well-defined.
If I try to find a better name for class CometEvent which reflects the lifecycle of it's instances according to the current implementation, the name CometRequest fits much better than the name CometConnection, but it does not fit perfectly yet. Have a look at my posting in thread 'Memory Leak with Comet' for more details. Matthias > -----Original Message----- > From: Rémy Maucherat [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:18 AM > To: Tomcat Users List > Subject: Re: comet events and connections > > > I think that the comet api represents a socket connection. > The event life > > cycle is bound to the connection life cycle. You get an END > (or ERROR etc) > > when the connection gets closed. But when you are writing > something that > > still looks like a servlet you would expect that the event > life cycle is > > bound to the request / response model. As soon as the > response is closed you > > would expect an END event. > > It's fine to have expectations, but that's not going to happen. It is > fine to compare with a Servlet, but the only thing that cannot be > compared (and somehow is the thing you apparently want to compare) is > evidently the lifecycle, which is completely different. > > Rémy > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
