Hello Jody
With the example that you gave us yesterday (Callable being serialized toward
an
other nodes in a cluster), I understand now the importance of comunicating
progress/cancelation through the Executor only.
So I assume that the interfaces would looks like that:
public interface Process {
void process(ProgressListener listener);
// Some input and output methods for parameters
}
Would it be appropriate to rename the other interfaces in a way that remind the
Executor / Future in java concurrency, so that someone familiar with them can
naturally make the parallel with the process interface? For example:
public interface ProcessExecutor {
ProcessFuture submit(Process);
}
public interface ProcessFuture extends Future {
void cancel();
}
(implementation of ProcessFuture could delegates most of its methods to a
java.util.concurrent.Future that it is wrapping)
One last question: I noticed that you define a new Parameter interface instead
of using the one that was defined in ISO 19111. I remember that you tell us
that
the ISO one was not useable in graphical user interfaces, but I have not
understood why... You have been very patient explaining me why you wanted
cancel() out of Callable. Is there any chance that you can use again some of
your great patience for explaining me why ISO 19111 is not suitable, and if
there is any thing we could do for fixing it?
I will be away until Wensday, so no rush I will not be able to read and answer
anyway...
Regards,
Martin
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
