On 15/08/2012 16:59, Mike Duigou wrote:
On Aug 15 2012, at 09:06 , Michael McMahon wrote:
:
Yes, the provider needs work. I agree with the above. Though I don't know about
the
necessity to provide multiple alternate providers.
If there is only ever going to be one provider then why include a provider
interface. I suspect that HttpClient will have about as many implementations as
there are JCE providers, ie. less than 10 but it is possible that someone may
have more than one simultaneously and want to select a particular provider.
I haven't studied this API in much detail yet but I assume that
HttpClientProvider is just a factory for HttpClients and when you invoke
HttpClient.createClient it just delegates to the system-wise provider to
create the HttpClient. Once the javadoc is fleshed out more then I
assume that it will document how the system-wise default provider is
chosen. I assume it just uses ServiceLoader with a system property or
some means to override. This approach would be consistent with how
several other provider interfaces work in the JDK. The approach also
doesn't preclude using multiple providers at the same time although if
you want a specific HttpClient then I assume it means getting a
reference to the provider and invoking its factory method directly. It's
the same thing with the NIO provider interfaces although the number of
provider implementations there will be a less than what I expect here.
-Alan.
