Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BufferedSource. #524

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 12, 2014
Merged

BufferedSource. #524

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 12, 2014

Conversation

swankjesse
Copy link
Collaborator

The Source API is nice for source implementors: no annoying
skip method, no annoying available() method, just one API to
supply bytes to the caller.

But it isn't as nice of an API for source callers. It lacks
convenient APIs!

This bridges the gap. Calling code should use BufferedSource,
and implementing code should implement Source.

The Source API is nice for source implementors: no annoying
skip method, no annoying available() method, just one API to
supply bytes to the caller.

But it isn't as nice of an API for source callers. It lacks
convenient APIs!

This bridges the gap. Calling code should use BufferedSource,
and implementing code should implement Source.
@codefromthecrypt
Copy link

test fail seems to only be occurring from travis. I've checked out the branch locally and it passes fine.

@codefromthecrypt
Copy link

good idea, @swankjesse! LGTM

codefromthecrypt pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 12, 2014
@codefromthecrypt codefromthecrypt merged commit c40cb63 into master Feb 12, 2014
@swankjesse swankjesse deleted the jwilson_0211_buffered_source branch February 14, 2014 22:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants