Dmitriy,
Annotations have @Retention(RetentionPolicy.CLASS)
which means
* Annotations are to be recorded in the class file by the compiler
* but need not be retained by the VM at run time. This is the default
* behavior.
So, from what I understand, everyone using ignite API with such annotations
still require them, correct?
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Anton, compile-time annotations should mean that Ignite should not require
> these libraries at runtime. Did you try it already and run into issues?
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 4:34 AM, Anton Vinogradov <
> avinogra...@gridgain.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Possible, what's the solution in this case?
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Sergi Vladykin <
> sergi.vlady...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I don't think that JB annotations is a runtime dependency, we should
> need
> > > them only at compile time, no?
> > >
> > > Sergi
> > >
> > > 2016-07-28 11:09 GMT+03:00 Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org>:
> > >
> > > > Igniters,
> > > >
> > > > As you may know we had only 2 dependencies at ignite-core: jcache and
> > > > ignite-shmen.
> > > >
> > > > IGNITE-3323 Get rid of copypasted JB annotations, use dependency
> > instead.
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3323> brings one more
> > > > dependency to org.jetbrains.annotations.
> > > > This solves problems for people using JB annotations at their
> projects.
> > > but
> > > > makes ignite-core less dependency-lightweight.
> > > >
> > > > JB annotaions are used to highlight null problems in IDE and provide
> > some
> > > > understanding to users on whether null is allowed/possible in
> concrete
> > > > place. I doubt other products/frameworks use it much.
> > > >
> > > > But, do we really need them? As for me, we can replace all these
> > > > annotations by asserts.
> > > >
> > > > I propose to discontinue usage of jb annotation and replace them by
> > > > asserts.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
