aurora-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Sirois <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] java gen: Uniform AsyncMethodCallback use in client and server
Date Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:39:07 GMT
Sorry folks - wrong list!  Please disregard.

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:35 PM, John Sirois <> wrote:

> I'd like to propose a breaking change in both the java generated service
> code and in supporting library code.  This change would change
> parametrization and use of clients to be symmetric with servers in the java
> async stack.
> Today the situation is as described in comments in
> Although you might expect an async client call that returns an int to look
> like:
>   `client.add(int first, int second, new AsyncMethodCallback<Integer>()
> {...});`
> It in fact looks like:
>   `client.add(int first, int second, new AsyncMethodCallback<add_call>()
> {...});`
> Where `add_call` is a type with an `int getResult() throws ...` method the
> client must call in the `AsyncMethodCallback.onComplete` implementation to
> retrieve the result of the async call, or else its remote error.
> This has been the case since initial commit in 2010, but there are several
> shortcomings, chief among these being:
> 1. The parametrization is highly un-expected.  Its neither the expected
> return type (like the server parametrization) nor a type at the same
> abstraction level as the decalring AsyncIface - its a type encapsulated by
> the AsyncClient _implementation_.
> 2. Because of the coupling to implementation in 1, we are not as free to
> modify the library implementation or generated code as we might be in a
> world where the AsyncIface was composed purely of standard value types
> (structs, ints, etc).
> It seems to me it would be wonderful to take our pre 1.0.0 status to
> correct this confusing and leaky API.
> I'm interested in what folks think.

John Sirois

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message