RE: [jbosscache-dev] Method storeEntireState is ambiguous with null parameter

-----Original Message----- From: Bela Ban Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 8:53 AM To: Vladimir Blagojevic Cc: Manik Surtani; jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Subject: Re: [jbosscache-dev] Method storeEntireState is ambiguous with null parameter +1 from me, although some folks might like the simplicity of byte[]. Although, to unmarshal, most folks will create an input stream off of the byte array anyway. Oops, NO, this doesn't work ! What about people who'd like to use java.nio.ByteBuffer ? There is *no* stream notion in NIO !!! E.g. byte[] state; ByteBuffer buf=ByteBuffer.wrap(state); buf.getInt(); bug.getLong(); etc etc Okay, I change my vote to -1... Vladimir Blagojevic wrote: > We really should. > > In the light of our recent conversations it really does not make sense > to keep byte based methods. Cacheloader implementors can easily make a > mistake and disrupt interoperability with other cacheloader > implementations. Another argument for having only 4 stream based > methods is that cacheloader implementors do not have to implement > separate methods for streaming and byte based transfer. > > Brian and I talked about this extensively. > > Let have another vote on this. > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Manik Surtani [mailto:manik@jboss.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 8:01 AM >> To: Vladimir Blagojevic >> Cc: jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> Subject: Re: [jbosscache-dev] Method storeEntireState is ambiguous >> with null parameter >> >> Are we not going to pull the byte[] methods from the interface, as >> per your conversation with Brian? >> -- >> Manik Surtani >> >> Lead, JBoss Cache >> JBoss, a division of Red Hat >> >> Email: manik(a)jboss.org >> Telephone: +44 7786 702 706 >> MSN: manik(a)surtani.org >> Yahoo/AIM/Skype: maniksurtani >> >> >> On 25 Aug 2006, at 17:25, Vladimir Blagojevic wrote: >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> As you might be aware Cacheloader 2.0 will add 4 methods >>> >> for streaming >> >>> state transfer: >>> >>> void storeEntireState(InputStream s); void storeState(Fqn >>> subtree,InputStream s); void loadEntireState(OutputStream s); void >>> loadState(Fqn subtree,OutputStream s); >>> >>> There is a slight problem will method overloading, namely >>> >> we have now >> >>> two methods: >>> >>> void storeEntireState(byte[] state) throws Exception; void >>> storeEntireState(InputStream is) throws Exception; >>> >>> which are properly overloaded. However, java compiler will >>> >> complain if >> >>> somebody invokes >>> >>> cacheloader.storeEntireState(null); >>> >>> Workaround is to declare actual parameter explicitly , i.e: >>> >>> >>> byte [] nullstate = null; >>> cacheloader.storeEntireState(nullstate); >>> >>> so that compiler can distinguish which overloaded method to invoke. >>> This is the case with our own BdbjeTest that was invoking >>> cl.storeEntireState(null); >>> >>> Does anyone have any complaints or concerns? If not, I >>> >> would proceed >> >>> with adding stream based methods to CacheLoader and adding noop >>> implementation methods to all implementers of CacheLoader interface. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> jbosscache-dev mailing list >>> jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-dev >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > jbosscache-dev mailing list > jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-dev > > -- Bela Ban Lead JGroups / Manager JBoss Clustering Group JBoss - a division of Red Hat