[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-637?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12904075#action_12904075
]
Philip Zeyliger commented on AVRO-637:
--------------------------------------
The schema we're talking about here is '{"type":"array", "items":"string"}',
no? In Java, "array" reads "List" to me. For the generated code, List is the
closest match we've got. (The generated code is not a good match for things
that don't fit into memory, so I'm not persuaded by the Iterable argument.)
General types are nice for writing, but they're a massive pain for reading. I
recently wrote an RPC Server using Avro Java, and the lack of get() on an array
that the client wrote was quite irritating (hence I'm a big fan of this jira).
At this layer, I think you have to choose the interfaces that are closest to
the implementation.
> GenericArray should implement Collection
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: AVRO-637
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-637
> Project: Avro
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: java
> Reporter: Doug Cutting
> Assignee: Doug Cutting
> Fix For: 1.5.0
>
> Attachments: AVRO-637.patch, AVRO-637.patch
>
>
> It would be nice if Avro arrays were better integrated with Java collections.
> The GenericArray interface permits array element reuse, which is awkward
> with java.util.Collection. But if GenericArray implemented Collection and
> the Avro runtime permitted arbitrary Collection implementations to be passed
> for Arrays then it would simplify many applications. The runtime could still
> reuse elements if an array implemented GenericArray, so performance would not
> suffer for applications that, e.g., loop over a data file, reusing instances.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
