Hello!
I think we should check that setField happily accepts both BinaryObject and
BinaryObjectBuilder, and then deprecate this method.
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
пт, 6 дек. 2019 г. в 16:02, Alexei Scherbakov <alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com
>:
> Looks like it's already possible to pass binary object as value using
> BinaryObjectBuilder setField(String name, Object val);
>
> If it works we can remove a signature with BinaryObjectBuilder.
>
> The API is truly confusing.
>
> пт, 6 дек. 2019 г. в 15:55, Николай Ижиков <nizhi...@apache.org>:
>
> > I’m too, Alex.
> >
> > But, this signature leads to the same error as I mentioned.
> >
> >
> >
> > > 6 дек. 2019 г., в 15:53, Alexei Scherbakov <
> alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com>
> > написал(а):
> > >
> > > I wonder why signature is not
> > >
> > > setField(String name, BinaryObject obj)
> > >
> > > пт, 6 дек. 2019 г. в 15:00, Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com
> >:
> > >
> > >> Hello!
> > >>
> > >> I think that repeating argument type name in method name is a code
> > smell.
> > >> Rather, we should describe how this method is different from other
> > methods
> > >> of its bunch.
> > >>
> > >> In this case, it is different since it allows you to create nested
> > binary
> > >> objects, i.e., ones with non-flat structure.
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >> --
> > >> Ilya Kasnacheev
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> пт, 6 дек. 2019 г. в 13:45, Николай Ижиков <nizhi...@apache.org>:
> > >>
> > >>> Hello, Ilya.
> > >>>
> > >>> I don’t get your point
> > >>>
> > >>>> We don’t passing … binary, just a … BinaryObjeсtBuilder.
> > >>>
> > >>> May be we should go with `setBinaryObjectBuilderField` or
> > >>> `setBinaryObjectField`?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> 6 дек. 2019 г., в 13:38, Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com
> >
> > >>> написал(а):
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hello!
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I can see where you are getting at, can we call it "setFieldNested"
> > >>> instead
> > >>>> or something like that?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> setBinaryField is confusing because we're not passing anything
> > >> especially
> > >>>> binary, just a nested BinaryObjectBuilder.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Regards,
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Ilya Kasnacheev
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> пт, 6 дек. 2019 г. в 13:17, Николай Ижиков <nizhi...@apache.org>:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hello, Igniters.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> We have confusing API in `BinaryObjectBuilder` class.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The code below leads to the `ClassCastException`
> > >>>>> The cause is java method resolution rules [1]
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> There may be more than one such method, in which case the most
> > >> specific
> > >>>>> one is chosen
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I suggest to deprecate `setField(String name, @Nullable
> > >>>>> BinaryObjectBuilder builder);` method and introduce
> > >>>>> `setBinaryField(String name, @Nullable BinaryObjectBuilder
> builder);`
> > >>>>> instead of it.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> What do you think?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ```
> > >>>>> public class BugTest extends GridCommonAbstractTest {
> > >>>>> @Test public void testBinaryObject() throws Exception {
> > >>>>> try (Ignite ignite = startGrid(0)) {
> > >>>>> BinaryObjectBuilder builder =
> > >>>>> ignite.binary().builder("testVal")
> > >>>>> .setField("name", "John Doe", String.class);
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> builder.setField("name", builder.getField("name"));
> > >>>>> }
> > >>>>> }
> > >>>>> }
> > >>>>> ```
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> [1]
> > >>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se11/html/jls-15.html#jls-15.12.2
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Alexei Scherbakov
> >
> >
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
> Alexei Scherbakov
>
