Re: SCTP for Java

2008-08-26 Thread David M. Lloyd
On 08/20/2008 04:37 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: Florian Weimer wrote: : I've been wondering for a while if it is possible (with reasonable additional effort) to add new socket and socket address classes without patching the JDK sources. No, it's not. :-) FWIW, a while back I prototyped an "in tre

Re: SCTP for Java

2008-08-26 Thread Christopher Hegarty - Sun Microsystems Ireland
On 08/26/08 14:41, David M. Lloyd wrote: On 08/20/2008 04:37 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: Florian Weimer wrote: : I've been wondering for a while if it is possible (with reasonable additional effort) to add new socket and socket address classes without patching the JDK sources. No, it's not. :-)

Re: SCTP for Java

2008-08-26 Thread Alan Bateman
Florian Weimer wrote: [Extensible socket types] : Do you think it would be possible to do this out-of-tree? I think I could port my client code to SocketChannel. (If I require a customized JDK, it will raise a few eyebrows.) It should be feasible but it would likely be a platform/provi

Re: SCTP for Java

2008-08-26 Thread David M. Lloyd
On 08/26/2008 09:20 AM, Christopher Hegarty - Sun Microsystems Ireland wrote: On 08/26/08 14:41, David M. Lloyd wrote: On 08/20/2008 04:37 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: FWIW, a while back I prototyped an "in tree" solution for SocketChannel. The primary motive was to allow for Sockets Direct Protoco

Re: SCTP for Java

2008-08-26 Thread Alan Bateman
David M. Lloyd wrote: : I just mean, what would be the benefit of using SocketAddress rather than using a String or Path directly? You can avoid the difficulties of extending SocketAddress by simply not using it. If the protocol or socket address is specified by String then the implementation

Re: SCTP for Java

2008-08-26 Thread David M. Lloyd
On 08/26/2008 11:12 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: David M. Lloyd wrote: : I just mean, what would be the benefit of using SocketAddress rather than using a String or Path directly? You can avoid the difficulties of extending SocketAddress by simply not using it. If the protocol or socket address is

Re: SCTP for Java

2008-08-26 Thread Alan Bateman
David M. Lloyd wrote: : No, the concern is just that the SocketAddress hierarchy is just kind of broken (the indicators are the fact that it's an empty abstract class, and that anywhere it's used, it's immediately casted to a more specific type). You could change this, but it still seems to m