Re: MINA3.0 recommended

2017-08-18 Thread Emmanuel Lécharny
Le 18/08/2017 à 15:54, Jonathan Valliere a écrit : > I don't have the code in front of me, but are you saying that the > modification of the Write Queue is no longer concurrent? Possibly the > Write Queue is a concurrent data structure and the synchronize mechanism is > no longer required. It s

Re: MINA3.0 recommended

2017-08-18 Thread Jonathan Valliere
I don't have the code in front of me, but are you saying that the modification of the Write Queue is no longer concurrent? Possibly the Write Queue is a concurrent data structure and the synchronize mechanism is no longer required. It seems odd that someone would remove concurrency from that crit

Re: MINA3.0 recommended

2017-08-18 Thread Emmanuel Lécharny
Replying on dev@mina.a.o. Thanks to avoid cross posting in the future :-) Le 18/08/2017 à 05:41, 胡阳 a écrit : > Hi guys: > I read the source code of MINA3.0M2. The style of the code is very > good, the structure is clear, the design is concise and efficient, especially > the use of Sel

MINA3.0 recommended

2017-08-17 Thread 胡阳
Hi guys: I read the source code of MINA3.0M2. The style of the code is very good, the structure is clear, the design is concise and efficient, especially the use of Selector is unexpected. However, the enqueueWriteRequest method and the processWrite method in the AbstractNioSession are