Inline responses.  We look forward to hearing about your work Benjamin!

On 3/5/12 9:12 AM, Benjamin Heitmann wrote:
On 2 Mar 2012, at 23:15, Avery Ching wrote:

If I'm reading this right, you're using a public abstract class for the vertex. 
 The vertex class must be instantiable and cannot be abstract.

Hope that helps,

Thanks, that was the right issue to point out. I removed the "abstract" 
keyword, which solved the issue.
(Of course, then I found lots of other bugs in my code... ;)

Glad to hear it.

After adding the abstract keyword, I ran into some problems in overriding "package 
private methods" of BasicVertex.
Almost all of the abstract methods in BasicVertex are declared as public, e.g.   
public abstract Iterable<M>  getMessages();

However, there are two methods which do not have the public keyword:
abstract void putMessages(Iterable<M>  messages);
abstract void releaseResources();

I am guessing that this inconsistency is just on oversight.

Actually, it is not. =) So the issue is that if we do make these methods not package-private (i.e. protected/public), then when a user subclasses a vertex, they will be able to shoot themselves in the foot by calling these methods which are only meant for internal use. Any other suggestions are welcome.

However, if I understood everything correctly, then this provides problems for 
developers who want to implement BasicVertex
*outside* of the Giraph source tree. As the public keyword is missing, it is 
not possible to override these two method signatures
from another package. The result, is that if I do not need IntIntNullIntVertex, 
but instead IntMyStateNullIntVertex which implements BasicVertex,
then I will need to either copy BasicVe

Is that the right reasoning, or is there some other pattern for using 
BasicVertex which I missed ?

Should I file a bug report somewhere ?

cheers, Benjamin.

Reply via email to