Santiago,
Few questions for you:
On 29/08/11 15:44, Santiago Pericas-Geertsen wrote:
>
> On Aug 26, 2011, at 3:05 PM, Bill Burke wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 8/26/11 2:48 PM, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>> Are you now suggesting we take the generic invocation out??
>>
>> Yes. I think many specifications try to incorporate a lot of edge cases and end up seriously bloating themselves. This may be one of those scenarios. At the time, it seemed like a good idea that wouldn't affect the API very harshly. Things have changed.
>
> -1
>
> Although in general I support the idea of simplifying the API, I disagree generic invocations is an edge case. Support for generic invocations is needed to make invocations first class; the ability to configure and store invocations in data structures for later retrieval and execution gives developers a greater flexibility on how to modularize (large) applications and it also enables lazy execution of invocations.
>
1. Do you really believe that most of JAX-RS 2.0 client API users will
code invoke() in the end of the chain ? Your -1 seems like a fairly
strong preference of invoke() at the end for all the cases.
2. What is your position re the compromise proposal to do with letting
users code get()/etc at the end of the chain without paying the price of
typing request() yet still easily being able to create Invocations
3. Do you agree that a single flow ending with get() is preferable to
a single flow ending with invoke() ?
Sergey
> -- Santiago
>
--
Sergey Beryozkin
http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com
Talend - http://www.talend.com