[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2817?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Matt Dailey updated ACCUMULO-2817:
----------------------------------
Attachment: ACCUMULO-2817.patch
Rebased onto master at revision {{8f6558c}}
This patch has my ideas on how abstract classes could be used.
* Removed {{decode(byte[], int, int)}} from the Encoder (and thus also
Lexicoder) interfaces, leaving them the same as on master.
* Added {{org.apache.accumulo.core.client.lexicoder.AbstractEncoder}}. It
implements {{decode(byte[])}} (required by Encoder interface), and
{{decode(byte[], int, int)}} (not part of an interface). It then defines
{{protected abstract T decodeUnchecked(byte[] b, int offset, int len)}}. This
does not change the Encoder or Lexicoder interfaces.
* Added {{org.apache.accumulo.core.client.lexicoder.AbstractLexicoder}}, which
extends AbstractEncoder and also implements Lexicoder.
* Refactored Lexicoders to extend AbstractLexicoder, and Encoders to extend
AbstractEncoder.
I think AbstractEncoder and AbstractLexicoder should be part of the public API
since they may be useful to others, and do not cause any breaking changes. I
looked through semver, and I don't think "any backwards incompatible changes
are introduced to the public API," but feel free to correct me.
*Question:*
Do I add "@since" to any public methods, or only ones implementing an
Interface, or all new methods?
> Add offset and limit arguments to byte array Encoder.decode method
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ACCUMULO-2817
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2817
> Project: Accumulo
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: client
> Reporter: Josh Elser
> Assignee: Matt Dailey
> Labels: newbie
> Fix For: 1.7.0
>
> Attachments: ACCUMULO-2817.patch, ACCUMULO-2817.patch
>
>
> Similar to ACCUMULO-2445, but presently the encoder only works on complete
> byte arrays. This forces an extra copy of the data when it is located in an
> array that contains other information (e.g. a composite key).
> It would be nice to be able to provide offset and length arguments to
> {{Encoder.decode}} so that users can avoid the additional arraycopy.
> Changing to a ByteBuffer instead of byte array argument would also be
> acceptable, but more churn on the API that, unless it's happening globally, I
> would rather avoid. It would also incur the penalty for that extra Object,
> which while minimal alone, could be significant if decoding every value in a
> table, for example.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
