-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mark,
On 6/6/12 2:42 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: > I'd rather not pass in the session object since it just encourages > folks to retain a copy of it and I am not at all convinced that is > a good idea for WebSockets. > > I have no objection to making session attributes available at that > point (or data from the request) but I don't like the idea of > providing direct access to the Request and Session objects. Neither > do I like the idea of having to proxy every getter... > > Hmm. We could wrap them with a façade and null out the underlying > objects once the HTTP request ends to "discourage" folks from > retaining references to them since all they'll get is NPEs. This was going to be my suggestion. There are a number of frameworks out there that avoid tightly binding application with the servlet API by exposing things as a java.util.Map instead of, say, javax.servlet.http.HttpSession or javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest. This strategy gives access to the underlying data (that is, the attributes), hides the real source of the data, and allows interception of arbitrary calls. So, we could either throw an NPE when the session/request goes "out of scope" with respect to the WebSocket message, or we could even throw a more useful exception that informs the client that the data is no longer accessible. - -chris -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk/PvioACgkQ9CaO5/Lv0PDvygCgmHBxHcTjqWAO+jiOKZOpygFH nCUAnRhTHnQlO7/9oQDeqYg+teopFrKB =RoX5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
