mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tuure Laurinolli <tuure.laurino...@indagon.com>
Subject Re: [AsyncWeb] Ideas for client
Date Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:35:26 GMT
Mike Heath wrote:

<snip>

>> I think in general some amount of knowledge about the request is unavoidable
>> on the response.  If the response object has no knowledge of what the
>> request was, there will be certain things that are not possible to do.
>>  There may be many examples, but one example I can think of is inspecting
>> the Set-Cookie header to accept or reject cookies.  Things like domain and
>> path validation are needed but that requires the request.  AHC's
>> HttpResponseMessage also does not know about the request, and it's been a
>> pain point.
> 
> I agree.  I've added an HttpRequestFuture that extends HttpFuture in my
> proposed API.  The HttpRequestFuture has a getHttpRequest() method on
> it.  I'm adding a few other tweaks and then I'll republish my proposed API.

Keeping the request around may be expensive, consider POSTs with a large 
body for example. However, I think that having the other information 
available in the response would be a good idea. However, it's not 
strictly necessary as that information (or the request itself, even) can 
be passed to the Listener directly, if a new listener is created for 
each request.


Mime
View raw message