I prefer the Writable. On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Thomas Jungblut <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I refactored the messaging in 0.3.0 and changed this from an inteface to an > abstract base class. > Currently it is fine, but I feel that the user is too restricted in using > messages. > You have this strict structure of tag and data. I think we should widen the > messages to just Messagable . > If we want to have the freedom to add additional things, we should extend > Messagable from Writable and use this for it. > > So send may look like this: > > public final void send(String peerName, Messagable msg) > > > and getCurrentMessage: > > public final Messagable getCurrentMessage() > > > However, I am not really happy that we return Messagable (requires casting > and stuff). > For the usecases of specific tagging we can add the getTag() method to the > Messagable interface. > What type should this be then? I mean, String would be quite a large > overhead. Integer might not be useful. > > Or should we widen this to Writable instead? So you can send things you've > read from sequencefiles directly to other tasks. > > What do you think? I am still not aware of how it should look like. Or are > you satisfied with the current messaging? > > -- > Thomas Jungblut > Berlin <[email protected]>
-- Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon @eddieyoon
