Trying to close on this. Since there wasn't a strong preference to
use the NIO2 style API or the proposed API, I would like to move forward
with the proposal with some of the changes
that were suggested to the API. We can put a note in the spec asking for
feedback when we
do an early draft to get the community input.
The changes that I have on the list to the proposal as of now are -
* try and move the methods from NIOInputSource and NIOOutputSink to
ServletInputStream and ServletOutputStream
* Rename any new NIOxxx API to AsyncIOxxx (although technically it
really isn't Async but more non-blocking)
Thanks
- Rajiv
> On 15 September 2011 18:00, Remy Maucherat<rmaucher_at_redhat.com> wrote:
>> I don't quite understand why this is a good design over the usual
>> blocking IO.
> I don't represent that NIO.2 style is a better design, just that it is
> the approach taken by java 7 and we should at least evaluate it.
> The example I gave is definitely not good design - nor should it be
> taken as representative of how NIO.2 style apis are used. It was just
> a simple example.
>
> Perhaps we could get somebody from the NIO.2 team to give us a
> presentation of why they did their API that way and we could then see
> if the reasons they give are applicable to servlet API.