<@U3YFHFL1L> you're right. the wrap() isn't neede...

# tornadofx

[carlw]

@hudsonb you're right. the wrap() isn't needed. I updated my gist accordingly (and pulled it out of the client's code too)

[altavir]

You can do ByteBuffer byteBuffer = ByteBuffer.wrap(a) instead of ByteBuffer byteBuffer = ByteBuffer.allocate(2); byteBuffer.put( a );. In this case you skip one additional memory allocation, you just reuse memory under a. For large binaries additional allocation could be expensive.

[carlw]

thx

[hudsonb]

Ya, sorry that's what meant with my example as well, should have been more clear.