jclouds-notifications mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ignasi Barrera <notificati...@github.com>
Subject Re: [jclouds/jclouds] Async interface changes for putBlob (#1114)
Date Mon, 10 Jul 2017 10:46:18 GMT
>I have also made changes to invoke function to return ListenableFuture.

That was the suggestion to simplify the base driver class code, if that didn't introduce significant
overhead. 

I think it actually makes sense for the driver implementations to have the invoke and invokeAsync
signatures meaningful, returning, or not, a future. What about keeping the old signatures
in the abstract methods and just wrap the sync result in an immediateFuture in the base class?
This way each driver implementation does not need to worry about returning a Future in their
sync method; that should be just the base class and internal jclouds logic.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/1114#issuecomment-314071247
Mime
View raw message