mapped io for non-default file system

[Alan Bateman]

On 01/07/2013 08:57, Philippe Marschall wrote:
> Ok, very well. What about AsynchronousFileChannel then? It's the only
> way to do asynchronous file IO and offers the same functionality as
> FileChannel except for #map (although in an asynchronous fashion). So
> unlike FileChannel it can be implemented fully by non-default file
> systems. Is the idea that non-default file systems can implement
> AsynchronousFileChannel but not FileChannel (because they can't
> implement #map) or should they implement neither?
>
The intention is that the provider can support both, either or none. We 
included this statement in the javadoc for both of the factory methods 
that FileSystemProvider defines:

"A provider that does not support all the features required to construct 
a XXX throws UnsupportedOperationException".

Clearly most of the providers that come up will not support either as 
it's just not practical (even SeekableByteChannel is a challenge in some 
cases).

-Alan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/attachments/20130701/44de4fbb/attachment.html