On Mar 12, 2008, at 9:53 AM, Bill Burke wrote:
> i'd rather have both. Again, it just seems very awkward to have to
> write an inner class or a separate class just to do streaming. So
> far, JAX-RS has been pretty elegant.
>
I think the solution described below is more elegant than the previous
one, it preserves the simple model where you return the HTTP response
from a resource method and does away with a bunch of additional rules
like requiring a void return when using the injected output stream
accessor type. The other solution introduces a completely new paradigm
for creating a response.
Marc.
> Marc Hadley wrote:
>> Not wishing to stifle an interesting debate but I'd like to move
>> towards a conclusion ;-). Can we close this issue with the proposal
>> below ? It gets Bill an OutputStream that can be used without
>> having to implement a MessageBodyWriter while not tying up a
>> service thread as desired by Jerome and Stephan. Seems like a
>> reasonable compromise to me.
>> Marc.
>> On Mar 10, 2008, at 3:59 PM, Marc Hadley wrote:
>>>
>>> public interface StreamedOutput {
>>> void write(OutputStream o);
>>> }
>>>
>>> Which can be returned when you want to do streaming - the spec
>>> would require implementations to support this type.
>> ---
>> Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
>> CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_jsr311.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_jsr311.dev.java.net
>
> --
> Bill Burke
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> http://bill.burkecentral.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_jsr311.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_jsr311.dev.java.net
>
---
Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.