You’re thinking about a pure implementation play, correct? RxJava or the Reactive Stream
constructs would not be exposed to the user as API. Am I correct?
Also for posterity, we had backchannel chats about it and you said you felt vert.x was not
necessarily addressing your needs. Could you elaborate a bit here?
Emmanuel
On 15 Jun 2017, at 23:20, William Burns <mudokonman(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
I was thinking more about [1] and I find that I was going to implement basically reactive
streams. What we have now in github is similar but it uses a very crude method of blocking
the thread to prevent back pressure. This can then cause severe issues as many users have
found out when they don't close iterator.
Unfortunately reactive streams is just a spec. I am proposing to add RxJava [2] as a
dependency [2] in the core module to provide access to reactive streams and the various
conversion methods. This library adds a bunch of support for built in back pressure,
transformations and much more which would reduce the amount of code I would need to write
substantially.
In regards to timing, I am thinking this is too close for 9.1, so maybe 9.2 or higher.
What do you guys think?
[1]
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-7865
<
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-7865>
[2]
https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJava <
https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJava>
[3]
https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/io.reactivex.rxjava2/rxjava/2.1.0
<
https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/io.reactivex.rxjava2/rxjava/2.1.0>_...
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev