On 25 Sep 2012, at 15:00, Sanne Grinovero wrote: > On 25 September 2012 12:11, Marko Lukša <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 25.9.2012 11:51, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >>>>>> Any comments / other ideas? >>>>>> >>>>>> Marko >>>>> That's a lot of changes needed. One would say we could deprecate all >>>>> methods and rewrite the new ones, but wouldn't it be better to >>>>> deprecate the interface and introduce a brand new one? >>>>> What about "ResultsIterator" ? after all, we're not iterating on queries.. >>>> I agree. The only thing that bothers me is that CacheQuery would then >>>> need new methods called (lazy)resultIterator() (instead of iterator(), >>>> which already exists). >>> Right. though I like "resultIterator()" more so we're having luck in >>> this case ;) >>> >>> Any better suggestion for names? Anyone thinks it's worth to remove >>> the old ones without a deprecation step to reuse the old names? >>> >> One thing to keep in mind is that CacheQuery extends Iterable, therefore >> a lot of users will actually implicitly invoke the iterator() method. >> This pretty much means we should not introduce resultIterator(). > > Looks like we have to break backwards compatibility. From the look of > how this API was, I guess not many users dealt with it before you, so > I'm fine with that, I don't see how else we can fix this API.
+1. Cheers, -- Mircea Markus Infinispan lead (www.infinispan.org)
_______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
