2015-03-18 13:15 GMT+01:00 Jozef Hartinger <jharting@redhat.com>:

On 03/18/2015 11:16 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:

sequentializing them arbitrarily just makes it not async anymore

the event firing thread won't wait for event delivery so it is still async

well doesn't change the fact you break original async need/wish doing it.

(+ think to the case you dont really have priorities you are just breaking the whole concept).

If you do not have priorities (or they are the same) then it is most likely fine to notify the observers in parallel. If you however do have priorities then it makes sense IMO to take them into account. Doing otherwise just complicates the entire concept by adding an artificial constraint.

point is you are introducing a model concept which is not aligned on the common model + doesn't even match correctly the async needs (what about onFailure() and onTimeout() which are mandatory when doing async)

I tend to join Mark saying we should just do the minimum instead of wanting to do to much and providing something highly broken we'll need to fix in next version with more broken patterns. What's the need is the real question, not what would be cool to implement.

Don't forget an async spec smells more and more strong with real async semantic and solutions so I guess the less we put in CDI now better it is.