[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3510?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15090708#comment-15090708
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on THRIFT-3510:
----------------------------------------
Github user nsuke commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/thrift/pull/762#issuecomment-170261731
@adamconnelly thanks for the clear and concise explanation and yes that's
how I misread somehow.
About the backward compatibility, I couldn't come up with any sensible
potential issue either, so it makes sense to me to remove the old path.
@JENS-G do you find it safe too to replace the behavior rather than to add
a flag, or any concern ?
For the Mono version: `async` is added in Mono 3.0.0 so it's likely that
it's the minimum working version for this addition (as already noted in another
ticket, it requires mcs compiler not gmcs).
> Add HttpTaskAsyncHandler implementation
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-3510
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3510
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: C# - Compiler, C# - Library
> Reporter: Adam Connelly
> Priority: Minor
>
> The THttpHandler doesn't support an async pipeline. This means that it's
> difficult for service implementations to make async calls. If there was an
> implementation of HttpTaskAsyncHandler, you could write services using async
> calls.
> Additionally, if you generate the C# classes with the current async support,
> you get a single interface with both sync and async methods. This doesn't
> really make sense on the server side since if you implement a service you end
> up leaving all the async method unimplemented. It would be useful if there
> were separate sync and async interfaces to make this a bit tidier.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
