batchee-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: provide AbstractTypedWriter
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2014 14:24:46 GMT
Hi guys,

I'm +1 on it but  we should  keep current impl this way and "mock"
state methods in a NoStateTypedXXXX impl to make it obvious. Not
implementing them is fine but needs to be really visible since you
loose some features.


Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau


2014-04-24 15:34 GMT+02:00 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>:
> agree, this could reduce the boiler plate code needed even more.
>
> By default we could implement it with null like it's done in the un-typed versions.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> On Thursday, 24 April 2014, 15:18, Reinhard Sandtner <reinhard.sandtner@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> if you extend org.apache.batchee.extras.typed.TypedWriter you must implement
>>
>>   protected abstract void doOpen(C checkpoint);
>>   protected abstract C doCheckpointInfo();
>>   protected abstract void doWriteItems(List<R> items);
>>
>>but in many cases you won’t do that.
>>
>>org.apache.batchee.extras.buffered.BufferedItemReader can extend AbstractTypedItemWriter
or shall we just implement a default doOpen() doCheckpointInfo()?
>>
>>lg
>>reini
>>
>>

Mime
View raw message