On 02/13/2014 07:33 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 02/13/2014 02:21 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 13/02/2014 12:54, Florian Weimer wrote:
Can we add further enumeration values to
java.net.StandardProtocolFamily? The spec does not say so, unlike
javax.lang.model.SourceVersion, and the code in the JDK expects a
binary flag, so I think the answer is "no".
Does this mean the expected way to add support for further protocol
families would be to create a separate implementation of
java.net.ProtocolFamily?
If there are protocol families that will be part of Java SE and
supported in all implementations then they could be added
StandardProtocolFamily. On the other hand, if this is platform or JDK
implementation specific then implementing ProtocolFamily is the way to
go (the enum extending interface pattern is something that we've used in
other areas too).
Okay, sounds reasonable. The PF_LOCAL protocol family is not available
with Winsock, so I guess it will have to be a separate enum then, with a
single member, although OpenJDK already requires PF_LOCAL support on the
non-Windows platforms.
Windows "named pipes" seem similar enough to UNIX sockets for a uniform
implementation (full-duplex, socket-like connection, byte- or
message-oriented, reliable delivery, file-like API, to list a few things
off of wikipedia). It was my intent to support them in XNIO on Windows
at some point, equivalently to UNIX sockets on other OSes, which I
already have some support for.
For this reason it was always a pet peeve of mine that OpenJDK hasn't
gone in for UNIX sockets.
--
- DML
