Re: [cdi-dev] async activation on observers, why not CompletableFuture

So instead of calling observers asynchronously you suggest turning observers into producers of CompletableFuture that will then be completed asynchronously? On 03/31/2015 06:21 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: // fire side event.fireAsync(new LetTheWorldKnow()).thenRun(() -> System.out.println("We did it!")); // observer side CompletableFuture iWantToKnow(@Observes LetTheWorldKnow event) {} // impl behavior would be like CompletableFuture.allOf(allObserverReturnedInstances) to be aligned on CompletableFuture behavior I think Am I clearer? Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber <http://www.tomitribe.com> 2015-03-31 18:15 GMT+02:00 Sven Linstaedt <sven.linstaedt(a)gmail.com&gt;: > Hi Romain, > > I am not sure, I have fully understand how an observer with CompletableFuture could > look like. Could you give us an example? > > Afair CompletableFuture was considered to be used in the "trigger" side > in order to track async event invocation completion. > > br, Sven > > 2015-03-31 18:00 GMT+02:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau(a)gmail.com&gt;: > >> Hi guys, >> >> on async topic if I followed we are at the point where we are looking >> for an activation on the observer side. >> >> Since Java 8 has now CompletableFuture it would be great to use it. >> Today the spec doesnt use observer returned values so it is mainly a bad >> practise to have one even if not strictly forbidden - BTW never saw it in >> real applications - plus spec is not compatible - not specified at all - >> with CompletableFuture since it is a new API so we can use it as a marker. >> >> This is quite interesting for few reasons: >> 1- we have our double activation >> 2- API is user friendly (observer is async and has an async signature) >> 3- open door for future async enhancements (hopefully not in CDI) with >> composition of these observers >> >> >> Only point I'm not sure is should these observers support sync events. >> I don't see anything blocking to do it but can have missed something. >> >> >> wdyt? >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber >> <http://www.tomitribe.com> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cdi-dev mailing list >> cdi-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev >> >> Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the >> code under the Apache License, Version 2 ( >> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas >> provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other >> intellectual property rights inherent in such information. >> > > _______________________________________________ cdi-dev mailing listcdi-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev Note that for all code provided on this list, the provider licenses the code under the Apache License, Version 2 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html). For all other ideas provided on this list, the provider waives all patent and other intellectual property rights inherent in such information.