kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven Aerts <steven.ae...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-218: Make KafkaFuture.Function java 8 lambda compatible
Date Tue, 19 Dec 2017 19:58:13 GMT
Hello Ismael.


Thanks for you feedback.

> 1. The KIP seems to rely on the pull request for some of the details of the
> proposal. Generally, the KIP should stand on its own.

Looking back at what I wrote in the KIP, I agree that its style is too
descriptive
and relies too much on the content of the PR.
I will keep it in mind, and try to do better next time.  But as the
voting is over I
assume I better not alter it any more.

> 2. Do we really need to deprecate `Function`? This will add build noise to
> any library that builds with 1.1+ but also wants to support 0.11 and 1.0.

No we don't.  It is all a matter of how fast we can and want an api tagged with
@Evolving, to evolve.
As we know, that it will evolve again when KIP-118 (dropping java 7) is
implemented.

As the voting is over, I am rather reluctant to change it.  But if more people
agree with you, I still want to do it.


> 3. `FunctionInterface` is a bit of a clunky name. Due to lambdas, users
> don't have to type the name themselves, so maybe it's fine as it is. An
> alternative would be `BaseFunction` or something like that.

I share a little bit your feeling, as the best name for me would just be
`Function`.  But that one is taken.

Again, voting is over, so if more people agree with you, I still want to reopen
and change it.


-- 
Steven

Mime
View raw message