Thanks, so I'm wondering why would we want to make an effort and let
users write
'public Response<List<Bean>>'
What is a List<Bean> on the wire ? It can not be properly described.
That of course can work, we can even customize easily the wrapper name,
etc, but I'm not sure it's a spec level issue at all
Cheers, Sergey
On 19/10/11 12:29, Marek Potociar wrote:
> See here for more explanation: http://java.net/jira/browse/JAX_RS_SPEC-108
>
> Marek
>
> On 10/16/2011 06:09 PM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On 14/10/11 17:20, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>> Hello experts,
>>>
>>> we've privately received some suggestions to make Req/Resp + builders generic.
>>>
>>> + The advantage would be the type safety as well as potential to preserve type information so that GenericEntity does
>>> not have to be utilized directly (e.g. HTTP resource methods that produce Response currently would be able to better
>>> declare the actual response entity type, provided the entity types produced share a common ancestor).
>>>
>>> - The main disadvantage I can think of is that generic req/response processing would (if correctly typed) require the
>>> extra "<?>" in many scenarios.
>>>
>>
>> What advantage can that give to the client code, would that interfere with the use of TypeLiteral in Response.getEntity
>> ? Personally I can live with the use of GenericEntity on the server side because IMHO the use of explicit collections is
>> not in 'mainstream', it seems most users are happy with dealing with plain beans - those can be better validated,
>> extended and described
>>
>> Cheers, Sergey
>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Marek
--
Sergey Beryozkin
http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com
Talend - http://www.talend.com