On 29/08/11 16:11, Santiago Pericas-Geertsen wrote:
>
> On Aug 29, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> No, that's not what I meant. I'm OK with the use of the method name at the end. However, I also like having the ability to pre-configure an invocation (including its method), store it in a data structure and execute it later in a another module by using invoke()/submit(), i.e. without the other module knowing what type of invocation it's executing.
>
> Hope that clarifies my position.
>
I'd appreciate if you could at least evaluate a proposal referred to at
2. below. That allows for preconfiguring target and initializing
Invocation with it and keep in structures and such - if it's what is
needed...
Sergey
> -- Santiago
>
>> 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
>>>