On 28/06/2013 12:47, Niki Dokovski wrote: > Hi folks, > while playing around with tyrus and tomcat implementation of websocket I > spotted a difference in the way sendBinary is actually implemented. In > short: tyrus uses bytebuffer.array(), hence there is no change in buffer's > position while we end with channel write operation that does this. Neither > the spec nor the javadoc detail that but the result is that one application > can run perfectly on one of the implementations and could cause problem on > the other. Shall we contact the EG for clarification on this matter?
No need. The EG has already stated its view (well, the EG lead did and no-one disagreed) <quote> Since the spec does not say anything about re-using ByteBuffers and they are mutable objects, I would expect the conventional developer practice to be to use a new one each time. </quote> > Opinions? I agree with the EG lead. Client's should not be making any assumptions about what the implementation will or won't do with a ByteBuffer. If you want to argue for a specific behaviour, open an issue against the spec. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
