Nigel,
wouldn't existing code need to do a downcast from MessageConsumer to
TopicSubscriber?
On 19.09.2011 13:40, Nigel Deakin wrote:
> On 16/09/2011 19:58, reza_rahman_at_lycos.com wrote:
>> +1. However, it would not be 100% backwards compatible, would it?
>>
> What kind of compatibility would this break? Existing application code
> would not need to be changed.
>
> Nigel
>
>
>> Sep 16, 2011 02:35:46 PM, jsr343-experts_at_jms-spec.java.net
>> <mailto:jsr343-experts_at_jms-spec.java.net> wrote:
>>
>> I have logged the following JIRA issue:
>> http://java.net/jira/browse/JMS_SPEC-51
>>
>> Here is the description, which I think is self-explanatory (I
>> originally raised this as part of JMS_SPEC-47, but I am
>> now separating it out to a separate trackable issue).
>>
>> There were no objections when I first suggested this, but if
>> anyone has any comments please make them now.
>>
>> ----------------------
>> In JMS 1.1 the method Session.createDurableSubscriber() returns a
>> TopicSubscriber, not a MessageConsumer.
>>
>> This is the only "domain-independent" method in the whole JMS 1.1
>> API which depends on a "domain-specific" interface.
>> This dependency prevents the "domain-specific" interfaces being
>> removed from JMS as proposed in JMS_SPEC-47
>>
>> It is therefore proposed to modify this method to return a
>> MessageConsumer. Since this is a supertype of TopicSubscriber
>> it should not break existing applications.
>> ----------------------
>>
>>
>> Nigel
>>
>>