<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Mircea Markus <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mmarkus@redhat.com" target="_blank">mmarkus@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im"><br>
On 3 Jun 2013, at 19:01, Dan Berindei <<a href="mailto:dan.berindei@gmail.com">dan.berindei@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Fair point... ok, let's leave it as it is now.<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Galder Zamarreño <<a href="mailto:galder@redhat.com">galder@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Jun 3, 2013, at 11:52 AM, Dan Berindei <<a href="mailto:dan.berindei@gmail.com">dan.berindei@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Hi guys<br>
>><br>
>> CacheLoaderInterceptor and DistributionInterceptor both honour the IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES flag for get commands, but I think it would be more useful if they ignored it - just like they ignore it for conditional commands.<br>
>><br>
>> That would make it possible for users to only keep a reference to a cache.getAdvancedCache().withFlags(IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES) and use it for both read and write operations.<br>
>><br>
>> What do you think?<br>
><br>
> If I was to take the role of a colleague of the person who's written the Infinispan code, it'd be very confused to see a cache reference created with IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES being used for a get() operation… I can see myself thinking: "Why on earth do you call get with IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES?"<br>
<br>
</div>Isn't Galder's point not to allow invoking get with IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES? As both of you pointed out, Get + IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES doesn't make any sense :-)<br><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br></div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You'd think conditional operations with IGNORE_RETURN_VALUES don't make sense either, yet we have a special case to handle those as if the flag wasn't present :)<br></div>
</div><br></div></div>