You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mina.apache.org by Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com> on 2007/09/18 03:14:56 UTC
New name for ByteBuffer?
Hi folks,
It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
time.
There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
directly.
I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
find out the best alternative.
Trustin
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Rodrigo Madera <ro...@gmail.com>.
When you have protocol _data_ it makes sense that the object is called
DataBuffer.
;-)
On 9/18/07, Jeroen Brattinga <je...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> LOL! I have to agree on DataBuffer, it sounds nice. OctetBuffer sounds a
> little too farfetched, IMO.
>
>
> Jeroen Brattinga
>
>
> Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> > MinaByteBuffer would fit me. I don't like OctetBuffer too much, even
> > if I'm french. What if M$ sudddenly decide that an Octet is 9 bits (8
> > bits for the data, plus 1 bit as a M$ tax to pay M$ fin to the EU ?:)
> >
> > On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se> wrote:
> >
> >> Trustin Lee wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi folks,
> >>>
> >>> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> >>> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> >>> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> >>> time.
> >>>
> >>> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> >>> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> >>> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> >>> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> >>> directly.
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> >>> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> >>> find out the best alternative.
> >>>
> >>> Trustin
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I
> think
> >> the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
> >> confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.
> >>
> >> Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
> >> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
> >>
> >> "Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
> >> having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term
> byte
> >> might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
> >> almost exclusively use octet."
> >>
> >> Also
> >>
> >> "In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means
> byte"
> >>
> >> This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Niklas Therning
> >> www.spamdrain.net
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Jeroen Brattinga <je...@gmail.com>.
LOL! I have to agree on DataBuffer, it sounds nice. OctetBuffer sounds a
little too farfetched, IMO.
Jeroen Brattinga
Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> MinaByteBuffer would fit me. I don't like OctetBuffer too much, even
> if I'm french. What if M$ sudddenly decide that an Octet is 9 bits (8
> bits for the data, plus 1 bit as a M$ tax to pay M$ fin to the EU ?:)
>
> On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se> wrote:
>
>> Trustin Lee wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
>>> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
>>> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
>>> time.
>>>
>>> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
>>> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
>>> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
>>> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
>>> directly.
>>>
>>> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
>>> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
>>> find out the best alternative.
>>>
>>> Trustin
>>>
>>>
>> Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I think
>> the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
>> confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.
>>
>> Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
>>
>> "Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
>> having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term byte
>> might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
>> almost exclusively use octet."
>>
>> Also
>>
>> "In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means byte"
>>
>> This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
>>
>> --
>> Niklas Therning
>> www.spamdrain.net
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Mark <el...@gmail.com>.
My vote is for MinaByteBuffer. Name it for what it is.
ExtendedByteBuffer is hard to rationalize since the class does not extend a
ByteBuffer.
WrappedByteBuffer is OK, but we already have a ByteBufferWrapper. This
could be confusing.
MINADataBuffer would be my second choice.
--
..Cheers
Mark
On 9/18/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> For the sake of some kind of consistency, DataBuffer.
>
> MINAByteBuffer will break the previous poll (capitalize only first
> letter).
>
> And talking about greeks : "Timeo Microsoftaens et dona ferentes" ...
>
> --
> Regards,
> Cordialement,
> Emmanuel Lécharny
> www.iktek.com
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@gmail.com>.
For the sake of some kind of consistency, DataBuffer.
MINAByteBuffer will break the previous poll (capitalize only first letter).
And talking about greeks : "Timeo Microsoftaens et dona ferentes" ...
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Julien Vermillard <jv...@archean.fr>.
MinaByteBuffer is not really making muxch sense here. We move from
IoSession to IOSession and choose to use Mina in place of MINA ?
Julien
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 09:56:50 +0200
"Emmanuel Lecharny" <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> MinaByteBuffer would fit me. I don't like OctetBuffer too much, even
> if I'm french. What if M$ sudddenly decide that an Octet is 9 bits (8
> bits for the data, plus 1 bit as a M$ tax to pay M$ fin to the EU ?:)
>
> On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se> wrote:
> > Trustin Lee wrote:
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> > > ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> > > actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> > > time.
> > >
> > > There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I
> > > don't think it's the best name available for us. I think
> > > DataBuffer, ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer
> > > might also be a candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but
> > > nobody uses that class directly.
> > >
> > > I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one.
> > > Please don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea
> > > so we can find out the best alternative.
> > >
> > > Trustin
> > >
> > Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I
> > think the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially
> > ExtendedByteBuffer) could be confusing. I think I prefer just
> > calling it Buffer.
> >
> > Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
> > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
> >
> > "Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an
> > entity having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where
> > the term byte might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer
> > networking standards almost exclusively use octet."
> >
> > Also
> >
> > "In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means
> > byte"
> >
> > This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
> >
> > --
> > Niklas Therning
> > www.spamdrain.net
> >
> >
>
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Maarten Bosteels <mb...@gmail.com>.
[x] DataBuffer
Maarten
On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se> wrote:
>
> I guess M$ would have to redefine the Greek (or is it Latin?) language
> then as well. :-)
>
> Seriously, I think DataBuffer or Buffer would be ok. On second thought
> MinaByteBuffer is ok too. I don't think it will be very confusing. It
> will certainly be less confusing than what we have at the moment.
>
> /Niklas
>
> Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> > MinaByteBuffer would fit me. I don't like OctetBuffer too much, even
> > if I'm french. What if M$ sudddenly decide that an Octet is 9 bits (8
> > bits for the data, plus 1 bit as a M$ tax to pay M$ fin to the EU ?:)
> >
> > On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se> wrote:
> >
> >> Trustin Lee wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi folks,
> >>>
> >>> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> >>> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> >>> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> >>> time.
> >>>
> >>> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> >>> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> >>> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> >>> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> >>> directly.
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> >>> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> >>> find out the best alternative.
> >>>
> >>> Trustin
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I
> think
> >> the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
> >> confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.
> >>
> >> Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
> >> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
> >>
> >> "Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
> >> having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term
> byte
> >> might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
> >> almost exclusively use octet."
> >>
> >> Also
> >>
> >> "In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means
> byte"
> >>
> >> This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Niklas Therning
> >> www.spamdrain.net
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se>.
I guess M$ would have to redefine the Greek (or is it Latin?) language
then as well. :-)
Seriously, I think DataBuffer or Buffer would be ok. On second thought
MinaByteBuffer is ok too. I don't think it will be very confusing. It
will certainly be less confusing than what we have at the moment.
/Niklas
Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> MinaByteBuffer would fit me. I don't like OctetBuffer too much, even
> if I'm french. What if M$ sudddenly decide that an Octet is 9 bits (8
> bits for the data, plus 1 bit as a M$ tax to pay M$ fin to the EU ?:)
>
> On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se> wrote:
>
>> Trustin Lee wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
>>> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
>>> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
>>> time.
>>>
>>> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
>>> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
>>> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
>>> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
>>> directly.
>>>
>>> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
>>> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
>>> find out the best alternative.
>>>
>>> Trustin
>>>
>>>
>> Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I think
>> the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
>> confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.
>>
>> Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
>>
>> "Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
>> having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term byte
>> might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
>> almost exclusively use octet."
>>
>> Also
>>
>> "In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means byte"
>>
>> This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
>>
>> --
>> Niklas Therning
>> www.spamdrain.net
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@gmail.com>.
MinaByteBuffer would fit me. I don't like OctetBuffer too much, even
if I'm french. What if M$ sudddenly decide that an Octet is 9 bits (8
bits for the data, plus 1 bit as a M$ tax to pay M$ fin to the EU ?:)
On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se> wrote:
> Trustin Lee wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> > ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> > actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> > time.
> >
> > There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> > think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> > ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> > candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> > directly.
> >
> > I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> > don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> > find out the best alternative.
> >
> > Trustin
> >
> Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I think
> the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
> confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.
>
> Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
>
> "Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
> having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term byte
> might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
> almost exclusively use octet."
>
> Also
>
> "In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means byte"
>
> This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
>
> --
> Niklas Therning
> www.spamdrain.net
>
>
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Jeroen Brattinga <je...@gmail.com>.
What about IoDataBuffer?
Jeroen Brattinga
Richard Wallace wrote:
> +0 DataBuffer
>
> I also agree with the argument against using "ByteBuffer" in the name,
> unless we actually change it to subclass the Java ByteBuffer. My vote
> is slightly in favor of DataBuffer, but it still doesn't sound/feel
> quite right to me. But I can't think of anything else at the moment
> and I think it's the best of what's been suggested so far.
>
> Rich
>
> Rodrigo Madera wrote:
>> I agree with the comment of not suffixing with ByteBuffer since it
>> incorrectly suggests that it's a subclass of the Java standard.
>>
>> I don't think just "Buffer" would be good because of the single word,
>> which
>> would normally describe an interface.
>>
>> So that's why I voted to something simple as xxxBuffer, which in this
>> case
>> was DataBuffer as Trustin suggested.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Rodrigo
>>
>> On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se> wrote:
>>
>>> Trustin Lee wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>
>>>> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
>>>> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
>>>> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
>>>> time.
>>>>
>>>> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
>>>> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
>>>> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
>>>> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
>>>> directly.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
>>>> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
>>>> find out the best alternative.
>>>>
>>>> Trustin
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I
>>> think
>>> the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
>>> confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.
>>>
>>> Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
>>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
>>>
>>> "Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
>>> having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term
>>> byte
>>> might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
>>> almost exclusively use octet."
>>>
>>> Also
>>>
>>> "In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means
>>> byte"
>>>
>>> This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Niklas Therning
>>> www.spamdrain.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Richard Wallace <rw...@thewallacepack.net>.
+0 DataBuffer
I also agree with the argument against using "ByteBuffer" in the name,
unless we actually change it to subclass the Java ByteBuffer. My vote
is slightly in favor of DataBuffer, but it still doesn't sound/feel
quite right to me. But I can't think of anything else at the moment and
I think it's the best of what's been suggested so far.
Rich
Rodrigo Madera wrote:
> I agree with the comment of not suffixing with ByteBuffer since it
> incorrectly suggests that it's a subclass of the Java standard.
>
> I don't think just "Buffer" would be good because of the single word, which
> would normally describe an interface.
>
> So that's why I voted to something simple as xxxBuffer, which in this case
> was DataBuffer as Trustin suggested.
>
> Regards,
> Rodrigo
>
> On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se> wrote:
>
>> Trustin Lee wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
>>> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
>>> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
>>> time.
>>>
>>> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
>>> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
>>> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
>>> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
>>> directly.
>>>
>>> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
>>> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
>>> find out the best alternative.
>>>
>>> Trustin
>>>
>>>
>> Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I think
>> the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
>> confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.
>>
>> Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
>>
>> "Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
>> having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term byte
>> might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
>> almost exclusively use octet."
>>
>> Also
>>
>> "In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means byte"
>>
>> This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
>>
>> --
>> Niklas Therning
>> www.spamdrain.net
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Rodrigo Madera <ro...@gmail.com>.
I agree with the comment of not suffixing with ByteBuffer since it
incorrectly suggests that it's a subclass of the Java standard.
I don't think just "Buffer" would be good because of the single word, which
would normally describe an interface.
So that's why I voted to something simple as xxxBuffer, which in this case
was DataBuffer as Trustin suggested.
Regards,
Rodrigo
On 9/18/07, Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se> wrote:
>
> Trustin Lee wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> > ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> > actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> > time.
> >
> > There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> > think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> > ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> > candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> > directly.
> >
> > I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> > don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> > find out the best alternative.
> >
> > Trustin
> >
> Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I think
> the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
> confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.
>
> Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
>
> "Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
> having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term byte
> might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
> almost exclusively use octet."
>
> Also
>
> "In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means byte"
>
> This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
>
> --
> Niklas Therning
> www.spamdrain.net
>
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Niklas Therning <ni...@trillian.se>.
Trustin Lee wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> time.
>
> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> directly.
>
> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> find out the best alternative.
>
> Trustin
>
Since MINA's ByteBuffer doesn't inherit from java.nio.ByteBuffer I think
the names ending in ByteBuffer (especially ExtendedByteBuffer) could be
confusing. I think I prefer just calling it Buffer.
Or maybe OctetBuffer? According to Wikipedia
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octet_%28computing%29):
"Octet, with the only exception noted below, always refers to an entity
having exactly eight bits. As such, it is often used where the term byte
might be ambiguous. For that reason, computer networking standards
almost exclusively use octet."
Also
"In France, French Canada and Romania, the word octet usually means byte"
This would make all the French and Romainian MINA users happy! :-)
--
Niklas Therning
www.spamdrain.net
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com>.
On 9/19/07, Mike Heath <mh...@apache.org> wrote:
> After reading this thread over and giving it some thought, I like
> IoBuffer best. It's the most consistent with the rest of the API.
> DataBuffer would be my second pick.
+1. I love IoBuffer, too. Is it time for vote then? It seems like
each person his or her preference over other's.
Trustin
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Mike Heath <mh...@apache.org>.
After reading this thread over and giving it some thought, I like
IoBuffer best. It's the most consistent with the rest of the API.
DataBuffer would be my second pick.
-Mike
Trustin Lee wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> time.
>
> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> directly.
>
> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> find out the best alternative.
>
> Trustin
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Rodrigo Madera <ro...@gmail.com>.
+1 DataBuffer.
Regards,
Rodrigo
On 9/17/07, Jeff Genender <jg...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> +1...renaming it would be good. When I explain it...I have to be very
> careful in saying "I mean Mina's ByteBuffer..not a regular ByteBuffer"
>
> Jeff
>
> Trustin Lee wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> > ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> > actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> > time.
> >
> > There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> > think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> > ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> > candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> > directly.
> >
> > I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> > don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> > find out the best alternative.
> >
> > Trustin
>
--
If Jack Bauer had been a Spartan, the movie would have been called "1".
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@apache.org>.
+1...renaming it would be good. When I explain it...I have to be very
careful in saying "I mean Mina's ByteBuffer..not a regular ByteBuffer"
Jeff
Trustin Lee wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> time.
>
> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> directly.
>
> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> find out the best alternative.
>
> Trustin
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by "Mehmet D. AKIN" <md...@gmail.com>.
I say DataBuffer or MinaByteBuffer
On 9/18/07, Trustin Lee <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> time.
>
> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> directly.
>
> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> find out the best alternative.
>
> Trustin
> --
> what we call human nature is actually human habit
> --
> http://gleamynode.net/
> --
> PGP Key ID: 0x0255ECA6
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by hezjing <he...@gmail.com>.
ExtendedByteBuffer, because it provides additional features to the
standard ByteBuffer.
On 9/18/07, Julien Vermillard <jv...@archean.fr> wrote:
>
> MINAByteBuffer, because it's MINA, not Mina and I like obvious names :)
> Julien
>
>
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:14:56 +0900
> "Trustin Lee" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> > ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> > actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> > time.
> >
> > There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> > think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> > ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> > candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> > directly.
> >
> > I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> > don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> > find out the best alternative.
> >
> > Trustin
>
--
Hez
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Lan Boon Ping <bo...@gmail.com>.
I would choose MINADataBuffer as there is a java.awt.image.DataBuffer.
Regards
Boon Ping.
On 9/18/07, Julien Vermillard <jv...@archean.fr> wrote:
>
>
> MINAByteBuffer, because it's MINA, not Mina and I like obvious names :)
> Julien
>
>
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:14:56 +0900
> "Trustin Lee" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> > ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> > actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> > time.
> >
> > There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> > think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> > ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> > candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> > directly.
> >
> > I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> > don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> > find out the best alternative.
> >
> > Trustin
>
Re: New name for ByteBuffer?
Posted by Julien Vermillard <jv...@archean.fr>.
MINAByteBuffer, because it's MINA, not Mina and I like obvious names :)
Julien
On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:14:56 +0900
"Trustin Lee" <tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> It is often confusing to discriminate MINA ByteBuffer and NIO
> ByteBuffer. Do we need renaming? I didn't have much difficulties
> actually because most Java code doesn't use both types at the same
> time.
>
> There was an opinion about renaming it to MinaByteBuffer, but I don't
> think it's the best name available for us. I think DataBuffer,
> ExtendedByteBuffer, ExtendedBuffer or just Buffer might also be a
> candidate. There's Buffer in NIO, too, but nobody uses that class
> directly.
>
> I'd like to find the best name; short and not confusing one. Please
> don't hesitate to respond to this message with your idea so we can
> find out the best alternative.
>
> Trustin