下面列出了javax.websocket.SendHandler#onResult ( ) 实例代码，或者点击链接到github查看源代码，也可以在右侧发表评论。
private void sendObjectImpl(final Object o, final SendHandler callback) {
try {
if (o instanceof String) {
sendText((String) o, callback);
} else if (o instanceof byte[]) {
sendBinary(ByteBuffer.wrap((byte[]) o), callback);
} else if (o instanceof ByteBuffer) {
sendBinary((ByteBuffer) o, callback);
} else if (encoding.canEncodeText(o.getClass())) {
sendText(encoding.encodeText(o), callback);
} else if (encoding.canEncodeBinary(o.getClass())) {
sendBinary(encoding.encodeBinary(o), callback);
} else {
// TODO: Replace on bug is fixed
// https://issues.jboss.org/browse/LOGTOOL-64
throw new EncodeException(o, "No suitable encoder found");
}
} catch (Exception e) {
callback.onResult(new SendResult(e));
}
}
void endMessage(SendHandler handler, SendResult result) {
boolean doWrite = false;
MessagePart mpNext = null;
synchronized (messagePartLock) {
fragmented = nextFragmented;
text = nextText;
mpNext = messagePartQueue.poll();
if (mpNext == null) {
messagePartInProgress.release();
} else if (!closed){
// Session may have been closed unexpectedly in the middle of
// sending a fragmented message closing the endpoint. If this
// happens, clearly there is no point trying to send the rest of
// the message.
doWrite = true;
}
}
if (doWrite) {
// Actual write has to be outside sync block to avoid possible
// deadlock between messagePartLock and writeLock in
// o.a.coyote.http11.upgrade.AbstractServletOutputStream
writeMessagePart(mpNext);
}
wsSession.updateLastActive();
// Some handlers, such as the IntermediateMessageHandler, do not have a
// nested handler so handler may be null.
if (handler != null) {
handler.onResult(result);
}
}
@Override
protected void doWrite(SendHandler handler, long blockingWriteTimeoutExpiry,
ByteBuffer... data) {
long timeout;
for (ByteBuffer byteBuffer : data) {
if (blockingWriteTimeoutExpiry == -1) {
timeout = getSendTimeout();
if (timeout < 1) {
timeout = Long.MAX_VALUE;
}
} else {
timeout = blockingWriteTimeoutExpiry - System.currentTimeMillis();
if (timeout < 0) {
SendResult sr = new SendResult(new IOException(sm.getString("wsRemoteEndpoint.writeTimeout")));
handler.onResult(sr);
}
}
try {
channel.write(byteBuffer).get(timeout, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS);
} catch (InterruptedException | ExecutionException | TimeoutException e) {
handler.onResult(new SendResult(e));
return;
}
}
handler.onResult(SENDRESULT_OK);
}
/**
*
* @param t The throwable associated with any error that
* occurred
* @param useDispatch Should {@link SendHandler#onResult(SendResult)} be
* called from a new thread, keeping in mind the
* requirements of
* {@link javax.websocket.RemoteEndpoint.Async}
*/
private void clearHandler(Throwable t, boolean useDispatch) {
// Setting the result marks this (partial) message as
// complete which means the next one may be sent which
// could update the value of the handler. Therefore, keep a
// local copy before signalling the end of the (partial)
// message.
SendHandler sh = handler;
handler = null;
buffers = null;
if (sh != null) {
if (useDispatch) {
OnResultRunnable r = new OnResultRunnable(sh, t);
AbstractEndpoint<?> endpoint = socketWrapper.getEndpoint();
Executor containerExecutor = endpoint.getExecutor();
if (endpoint.isRunning() && containerExecutor != null) {
containerExecutor.execute(r);
} else {
// Can't use the executor so call the runnable directly.
// This may not be strictly specification compliant in all
// cases but during shutdown only close messages are going
// to be sent so there should not be the issue of nested
// calls leading to stack overflow as described in bug
// 55715. The issues with nested calls was the reason for
// the separate thread requirement in the specification.
r.run();
}
} else {
if (t == null) {
sh.onResult(new SendResult());
} else {
sh.onResult(new SendResult(t));
}
}
}
}
void endMessage(SendHandler handler, SendResult result) {
boolean doWrite = false;
MessagePart mpNext = null;
synchronized (messagePartLock) {
fragmented = nextFragmented;
text = nextText;
mpNext = messagePartQueue.poll();
if (mpNext == null) {
messagePartInProgress = false;
} else if (!closed){
// Session may have been closed unexpectedly in the middle of
// sending a fragmented message closing the endpoint. If this
// happens, clearly there is no point trying to send the rest of
// the message.
doWrite = true;
}
}
if (doWrite) {
// Actual write has to be outside sync block to avoid possible
// deadlock between messagePartLock and writeLock in
// o.a.coyote.http11.upgrade.AbstractServletOutputStream
writeMessagePart(mpNext);
}
wsSession.updateLastActive();
// Some handlers, such as the IntermediateMessageHandler, do not have a
// nested handler so handler may be null.
if (handler != null) {
handler.onResult(result);
}
}
/**
*
* @param t The throwable associated with any error that
* occurred
* @param useDispatch Should {@link SendHandler#onResult(SendResult)} be
* called from a new thread, keeping in mind the
* requirements of
* {@link javax.websocket.RemoteEndpoint.Async}
*/
private void clearHandler(Throwable t, boolean useDispatch) {
// Setting the result marks this (partial) message as
// complete which means the next one may be sent which
// could update the value of the handler. Therefore, keep a
// local copy before signalling the end of the (partial)
// message.
SendHandler sh = handler;
handler = null;
buffers = null;
if (sh != null) {
if (useDispatch) {
OnResultRunnable r = onResultRunnables.poll();
if (r == null) {
r = new OnResultRunnable(onResultRunnables);
}
r.init(sh, t);
if (executorService == null || executorService.isShutdown()) {
// Can't use the executor so call the runnable directly.
// This may not be strictly specification compliant in all
// cases but during shutdown only close messages are going
// to be sent so there should not be the issue of nested
// calls leading to stack overflow as described in bug
// 55715. The issues with nested calls was the reason for
// the separate thread requirement in the specification.
r.run();
} else {
executorService.execute(r);
}
} else {
if (t == null) {
sh.onResult(new SendResult());
} else {
sh.onResult(new SendResult(t));
}
}
}
}
void endMessage(SendHandler handler, SendResult result) {
boolean doWrite = false;
MessagePart mpNext = null;
synchronized (messagePartLock) {
fragmented = nextFragmented;
text = nextText;
mpNext = messagePartQueue.poll();
if (mpNext == null) {
messagePartInProgress = false;
} else if (!closed){
// Session may have been closed unexpectedly in the middle of
// sending a fragmented message closing the endpoint. If this
// happens, clearly there is no point trying to send the rest of
// the message.
doWrite = true;
}
}
if (doWrite) {
// Actual write has to be outside sync block to avoid possible
// deadlock between messagePartLock and writeLock in
// o.a.coyote.http11.upgrade.AbstractServletOutputStream
writeMessagePart(mpNext);
}
wsSession.updateLastActive();
// Some handlers, such as the IntermediateMessageHandler, do not have a
// nested handler so handler may be null.
if (handler != null) {
handler.onResult(result);
}
}
/**
*
* @param t The throwable associated with any error that
* occurred
* @param useDispatch Should {@link SendHandler#onResult(SendResult)} be
* called from a new thread, keeping in mind the
* requirements of
* {@link javax.websocket.RemoteEndpoint.Async}
*/
private void clearHandler(Throwable t, boolean useDispatch) {
// Setting the result marks this (partial) message as
// complete which means the next one may be sent which
// could update the value of the handler. Therefore, keep a
// local copy before signalling the end of the (partial)
// message.
SendHandler sh = handler;
handler = null;
buffers = null;
if (sh != null) {
if (useDispatch) {
OnResultRunnable r = onResultRunnables.poll();
if (r == null) {
r = new OnResultRunnable(onResultRunnables);
}
r.init(sh, t);
if (executorService == null || executorService.isShutdown()) {
// Can't use the executor so call the runnable directly.
// This may not be strictly specification compliant in all
// cases but during shutdown only close messages are going
// to be sent so there should not be the issue of nested
// calls leading to stack overflow as described in bug
// 55715. The issues with nested calls was the reason for
// the separate thread requirement in the specification.
r.run();
} else {
executorService.execute(r);
}
} else {
if (t == null) {
sh.onResult(new SendResult());
} else {
sh.onResult(new SendResult(t));
}
}
}
}
void startMessage(byte opCode, ByteBuffer payload, boolean last,
SendHandler handler) {
wsSession.updateLastActive();
List<MessagePart> messageParts = new ArrayList<>();
messageParts.add(new MessagePart(last, 0, opCode, payload,
intermediateMessageHandler,
new EndMessageHandler(this, handler), -1));
try {
messageParts = transformation.sendMessagePart(messageParts);
} catch (IOException ioe) {
handler.onResult(new SendResult(ioe));
return;
}
// Some extensions/transformations may buffer messages so it is possible
// that no message parts will be returned. If this is the case the
// trigger the supplied SendHandler
if (messageParts.size() == 0) {
handler.onResult(new SendResult());
return;
}
MessagePart mp = messageParts.remove(0);
boolean doWrite = false;
synchronized (messagePartLock) {
if (Constants.OPCODE_CLOSE == mp.getOpCode() && getBatchingAllowed()) {
// Should not happen. To late to send batched messages now since
// the session has been closed. Complain loudly.
log.warn(sm.getString("wsRemoteEndpoint.flushOnCloseFailed"));
}
if (messagePartInProgress.tryAcquire()) {
doWrite = true;
} else {
// When a control message is sent while another message is being
// sent, the control message is queued. Chances are the
// subsequent data message part will end up queued while the
// control message is sent. The logic in this class (state
// machine, EndMessageHandler, TextMessageSendHandler) ensures
// that there will only ever be one data message part in the
// queue. There could be multiple control messages in the queue.
// Add it to the queue
messagePartQueue.add(mp);
}
// Add any remaining messages to the queue
messagePartQueue.addAll(messageParts);
}
if (doWrite) {
// Actual write has to be outside sync block to avoid possible
// deadlock between messagePartLock and writeLock in
// o.a.coyote.http11.upgrade.AbstractServletOutputStream
writeMessagePart(mp);
}
}
void startMessage(byte opCode, ByteBuffer payload, boolean last,
SendHandler handler) {
wsSession.updateLastActive();
List<MessagePart> messageParts = new ArrayList<MessagePart>();
messageParts.add(new MessagePart(last, 0, opCode, payload,
intermediateMessageHandler,
new EndMessageHandler(this, handler)));
messageParts = transformation.sendMessagePart(messageParts);
// Some extensions/transformations may buffer messages so it is possible
// that no message parts will be returned. If this is the case the
// trigger the suppler SendHandler
if (messageParts.size() == 0) {
handler.onResult(new SendResult());
return;
}
MessagePart mp = messageParts.remove(0);
boolean doWrite = false;
synchronized (messagePartLock) {
if (Constants.OPCODE_CLOSE == mp.getOpCode() && getBatchingAllowed()) {
// Should not happen. To late to send batched messages now since
// the session has been closed. Complain loudly.
log.warn(sm.getString("wsRemoteEndpoint.flushOnCloseFailed"));
}
if (messagePartInProgress) {
// When a control message is sent while another message is being
// sent, the control message is queued. Chances are the
// subsequent data message part will end up queued while the
// control message is sent. The logic in this class (state
// machine, EndMessageHandler, TextMessageSendHandler) ensures
// that there will only ever be one data message part in the
// queue. There could be multiple control messages in the queue.
// Add it to the queue
messagePartQueue.add(mp);
} else {
messagePartInProgress = true;
doWrite = true;
}
// Add any remaining messages to the queue
messagePartQueue.addAll(messageParts);
}
if (doWrite) {
// Actual write has to be outside sync block to avoid possible
// deadlock between messagePartLock and writeLock in
// o.a.coyote.http11.upgrade.AbstractServletOutputStream
writeMessagePart(mp);
}
}
void startMessage(byte opCode, ByteBuffer payload, boolean last,
SendHandler handler) {
wsSession.updateLastActive();
List<MessagePart> messageParts = new ArrayList<MessagePart>();
messageParts.add(new MessagePart(last, 0, opCode, payload,
intermediateMessageHandler,
new EndMessageHandler(this, handler)));
messageParts = transformation.sendMessagePart(messageParts);
// Some extensions/transformations may buffer messages so it is possible
// that no message parts will be returned. If this is the case the
// trigger the suppler SendHandler
if (messageParts.size() == 0) {
handler.onResult(new SendResult());
return;
}
MessagePart mp = messageParts.remove(0);
boolean doWrite = false;
synchronized (messagePartLock) {
if (Constants.OPCODE_CLOSE == mp.getOpCode() && getBatchingAllowed()) {
// Should not happen. To late to send batched messages now since
// the session has been closed. Complain loudly.
log.warn(sm.getString("wsRemoteEndpoint.flushOnCloseFailed"));
}
if (messagePartInProgress) {
// When a control message is sent while another message is being
// sent, the control message is queued. Chances are the
// subsequent data message part will end up queued while the
// control message is sent. The logic in this class (state
// machine, EndMessageHandler, TextMessageSendHandler) ensures
// that there will only ever be one data message part in the
// queue. There could be multiple control messages in the queue.
// Add it to the queue
messagePartQueue.add(mp);
} else {
messagePartInProgress = true;
doWrite = true;
}
// Add any remaining messages to the queue
messagePartQueue.addAll(messageParts);
}
if (doWrite) {
// Actual write has to be outside sync block to avoid possible
// deadlock between messagePartLock and writeLock in
// o.a.coyote.http11.upgrade.AbstractServletOutputStream
writeMessagePart(mp);
}
}