I like IoBuffer.
Look at the documentation...
http://mina.apache.org/documentation.html
The basic constructs are:
* ByteBuffer
* IoService
* IoHandler
* IoFilter
* IoFuture
Which one doesn't fit?
Cameron
On 9/18/07, Rob Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No one likes IoBuffer eh.. Honestly it seems like the best name to me.
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Jeroen Brattinga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 12:04:14 PM
> Subject: Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
>
> What about IoDataBuffer?
>
>
> Jeroen Brattinga
>
>
> Richard Wallace wrote:
> > +0 DataBuffer
> >
> > I also agree with the argument against using "ByteBuffer" in the name,
> > unless we actually change it to subclass the Java ByteBuffer. My vote
> > is slightly in favor of DataBuffer, but it still doesn't sound/feel
> > quite right to me. But I can't think of anything else at the moment
> > and I think it's the best of what's been suggested so far.
> >
> > Rich
> >
> > Rodrigo Madera wrote:
> >> I agree with the comment of not suffixing with ByteBuffer since it
> >> incorrectly suggests that it's a subclass of the Java standard.
> >>
> >> I don't think just "Buffer" would be good because of the single word,
> >> which
> >> would normally describe an interface.
> >>
> >> So that's why I voted to something simple as xxxBuffer, which in this
> >> case
> >> was DataBuffer as Trustin suggested.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Rodrigo
> >>
> >> On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Trustin Lee wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi folks,
> >>>>
> >>>> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> >>>> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> >>>> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> >>>> time.
> >>>>
> >>>> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> >>>> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> >>>> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> >>>> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> >>>> directly.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> >>>> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> >>>> find out the best alternative.
> >>>>
> >>>> Trustin
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I
> >>> think
> >>> the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
> >>> confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.
> >>>
> >>> Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
> >>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
> >>>
> >>> "Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
> >>> having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term
> >>> byte
> >>> might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
> >>> almost exclusively use octet."
> >>>
> >>> Also
> >>>
> >>> "In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means
> >>> byte"
> >>>
> >>> This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Niklas Therning
> >>> www.spamdrain.net
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all
> the tools to get online.
> http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting
>
