FYI - more feedback from just another developer that happens to care a great deal about
EE.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Josh Juneau <juneau001(a)gmail.com>
Date: March 8, 2016 at 7:41:56 AM EST
To: "users(a)javaee-spec.java.net" <users(a)javaee-spec.java.net>
Subject: [javaee-spec users] Re: CompletableFuture Usage in the Platfom vs CDI
Reply-To: users(a)javaee-spec.java.net
Reza-
I am in agreement with you. I agree that CompleteableFuture seems to make more sense for
asynchronous events than CompletionStage. Given that it is widely acceptable throughout
the platform, and the naming aligns more closely with asynchronous activity...I think
CompleteableFuture would be a more consistent and standardized choice.
Thanks
Josh Juneau
juneau001(a)gmail.com
http://jj-blogger.blogspot.com
https://www.apress.com/index.php/author/author/view/id/1866
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Reza Rahman <reza_rahman(a)lycos.com> wrote:
> The CDI EG is incorporating the concept of CompletableFuture into asynchronous
events. Unfortunately for reasons I really don't see as good they are using it's
superinterface CompletionStage instead of CompletableFuture.
>
> I think this is a big ease-of-use mistake as CompletableFuture is designed to be the
end user high level gateway API while CompletionStage is mostly as SPI intended for
framework writers.
>
> Given that the CompletableFuture concept is pretty widely applicable throughout the
platform I think there is a need for consistency, oversight and guidance from the platform
expert group. Otherwise I fear less than ideal ad-hoc decisions might be made in this case
for CDI and possibly others down the line.
>
> What do you think?