incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Todd Lipcon <t...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: build fails with "ant clean gen-thrift-java build"
Date Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:20:08 GMT
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Jonathan Ellis <jbellis@gmail.com> wrote:

> i think historically there has been a no-arg constructor and one w/ all
> args.
>
> imo correct behavior is one with only req'd args, and one w/ all.
>
> I think having one with no args is good as well. The problem with having
one with only required args is that java doesn't have keyword arguments. So,
if you have a struct with several required members, you're going to have
"new Foo(a,b,c,d,e,f)" for example. If the order (or names) of fields
changes or something, you can break your app without generating a
compilation error, whereas if you're using explicit setters, you'll catch
it.

-Todd

rule of thumb: if it breaks cassandra, it's a bug. :)
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Gary Dusbabek <gdusbabek@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > 2009/12/3 Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>:
> >> On Thu, 3 Dec 2009 06:42:27 -0600 Gary Dusbabek <gdusbabek@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> GD> This seems to be a Thrift regression.  It is failing to generate any
> >> GD> but the no-arg constructors.  I saw this about a week ago but never
> >> GD> got around to filing a Thrift ticket against it.
> >>
> >> GD> Your best bet, other than rolling back to an older version of
> thrift,
> >> GD> is to add the constructors yourself from the old code.
> >>
> >> I could also file a Thrift bug.  Or are you implying you'll do it?
> >
> > If it is a bug.  I never made time to do the research, but here is
> > what seems to be happening...
> >
> > Optional members are not included in the constructor, required members
> > are.  I'm not sure if they ever were, and the constructors were just
> > manually added after generation or not.
> >
> > E.g.,
> >
> > struct ColumnParent1 {
> >    3: required string column_family,
> >    4: optional binary super_column,
> > }
> >
> > generates:
> >
> >  public ColumnParent1(String column_family)
> >  {
> >    this();
> >    this.column_family = column_family;
> >  }
> >
> > whereas:
> >
> > struct ColumnParent3 {
> >    3: required string column_family,
> >    4: required binary super_column,
> > }
> >
> > generates:
> >
> >  public ColumnParent3(String column_family, byte[] super_column)
> >  {
> >    this();
> >    this.column_family = column_family;
> >    this.super_column = super_column;
> >  }
> >
> >
> > Changing the optional fields to required solves the problem and
> > creates the necessary constructors, or the required constructors can
> > be added.
> >
> > Unfortunately, I'm a thrift noob too.  Old-timers, what is the correct
> behavior?
> >
> > Gary.
> >
>

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