Hey,
I see that you have changed and moved around a lot of things regarding the functions for the API. Also these Rich functions were introduced. Since it pretty much broke our whole API and I have to rewrite a lot of things, do you think I should use the RichFunctions instead of the standard ones? Or are you going to support both in the API? Regards, Gyula |
Okay, it didnt take me too much time to replace the regular functions with
the Rich versions and everything works again. I still need to do some cleanups before I can push it, but I will finnish it today and that should also fix the pull request. Also +1 for the RichFunctions, we were missing the open() and close() calls from the API anyways :) On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Gyula Fóra <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hey, > > I see that you have changed and moved around a lot of things regarding the > functions for the API. Also these Rich functions were introduced. > > Since it pretty much broke our whole API and I have to rewrite a lot of > things, do you think I should use the RichFunctions instead of the standard > ones? Or are you going to support both in the API? > > Regards, > Gyula > |
Hi Gyula,
Sorry for not giving you a heads up for this. We changed the API to work on the interfaces that contain one abstract method rather than the rich functions in order to support Java 8 lambdas down the road (this is not done yet). We did this now in order to bundle as many breaking changes as possible in the 0.6 release. The API will support both rich and standard functions. In order to use a standard function, you need to implement the FooFunction interface of the common API (e.g., MapFunction) , in order to use a rich function you need to extend the RichFooFunction class. The examples have also been refactored. You can use either, depending on whether you need the extra functionality provided by the rich functions. I think that it would be a good idea to also allow the user of the streaming API to use the simple functions to the degree that this is possible. Take a look also at the "Functions" paragraph of this PR: https://github.com/apache/incubator-flink/pull/87 Kostas On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Gyula Fóra <[hidden email]> wrote: > Okay, it didnt take me too much time to replace the regular functions with > the Rich versions and everything works again. I still need to do some > cleanups before I can push it, but I will finnish it today and that should > also fix the pull request. > > Also +1 for the RichFunctions, we were missing the open() and close() calls > from the API anyways :) > > > On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Gyula Fóra <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > Hey, > > > > I see that you have changed and moved around a lot of things regarding > the > > functions for the API. Also these Rich functions were introduced. > > > > Since it pretty much broke our whole API and I have to rewrite a lot of > > things, do you think I should use the RichFunctions instead of the > standard > > ones? Or are you going to support both in the API? > > > > Regards, > > Gyula > > > |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |