Do I need to change my current codec using ByteBuffer?
On 9/19/07, Maarten Bosteels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > IoBuffer is OK for me, certainly better than MinaByteBuffer > > Maarten > > On 9/18/07, Cameron Taggart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 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 > > > > > >
