Re: [undertow-dev] websocket per-message compression & design q
On 2015-08-11 23:51, Stuart Douglas wrote:
Something we have been talking about for a while is the introduction
of
a
different underlying API than the XNIO Channel, probably taking a form
similar to send(Pooled<ByteBuffer> buff), where the caller basically
just
transfers 'ownership' of the buffer to the underlying sender.
For websockets this would definitely make the extension implementation
much
easier.
I have free cycles, so I'll play around with hacking at this.
I'll try and make a send(Pooled<ByteBuffer>) the primary work function
for a AbstractFramedStreakSinkChannel.
The existing 'long write(...)' methods will just delegate to the new
function, and hopefully it will fall out such that everything works :)
-pete
--
(peter.royal|osi)(a)pobox.com - http://fotap.org/~osi