Why didn't Sun put common methods found in DatagramChannel and SocketChannel higher up the hierachy?

Thread view:

- - 24 Jul 2005 11:20 GMT

I noticed that most of the abstract methods in DatagramChannel and
SocketChannel are the same. Why didn't Sun put those methods higher up
by creating a class that extends AbstractSelectableChannel?

Reply to this Message

Stefan Schulz - 24 Jul 2005 12:31 GMT

> I noticed that most of the abstract methods in DatagramChannel and
> SocketChannel are the same. Why didn't Sun put those methods higher up
> by creating a class that extends AbstractSelectableChannel?

Ask whoever did the NIO design. It alternates between absolutely divine
concepts and absolutely abysmal ones. (Buffers, anyone?)

Signature

You can't run away forever,
But there's nothing wrong with getting a good head start.
--- Jim Steinman, "Rock and Roll Dreams Come Through"

Reply to this Message

Harald - 24 Jul 2005 18:19 GMT

> Ask whoever did the NIO design. It alternates between absolutely divine
> concepts and absolutely abysmal ones. (Buffers, anyone?)

You mean Buffers instanceof Abysmal? I completely agree. To flip() or
not to flip() is always the question. What would be wrong with a
straight forward circular buffer design is a mystery to me.

Harald.

Signature

---------------------+---------------------------------------------
Harald Kirsch (@home)|
Java Text Crunching: http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Rebholz-srv/whatizit/software

Reply to this Message

Why didn't Sun put common methods found in DatagramChannel and SocketChannel higher up the hierachy?

Free Magazines