Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch from Guava futures vs Java 8 futures

[Kenneth Knowles]

For anyone just following the dev list, this is completed.

On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:34 AM, Holden Karau  wrote:

> For what it's worth there exists a relatively easy Java8 to Scala future
> conversion so this shouldn't cause an issue on the Spark runner.
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:22 PM, Alexey Romanenko <
> aromanenko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1, sounds great!
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alexey
>>
>>
>> On 2 Feb 2018, at 07:14, Thomas Weise  wrote:
>>
>> +1
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 02/01/2018 07:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> >
>>> > Luke, Thomas, and I had some in-person discussions about the use of
>>> Java 8
>>> > futures and Guava futures in the portability support code. I wanted to
>>> bring our
>>> > thoughts to the dev list for feedback.
>>> >
>>> > As background:
>>> >
>>> >  - Java 5+ "Future" lacks the main purpose of future, which is async
>>> chaining.
>>> >  - Guava introduced ListenableFuture to do real future-oriented
>>> programming
>>> >  - Java 8 added CompletionStage which is more-or-less the expected
>>> interface
>>> >
>>> > It is still debatable whether Java got it right [1]. But since it is
>>> > standardized, doesn't need to be shaded, etc, it is worth trying to
>>> just use it
>>> > carefully in the right ways. So we thought to propose that we migrate
>>> most uses
>>> > of Guava futures to Java 8 futures.
>>> >
>>> > What do you think? Have we missed an important problem that would make
>>> this a
>>> > deal-breaker?
>>> >
>>> > Kenn
>>> >
>>> > [1]
>>> > e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38744943/listenable
>>> future-vs-completablefuture#comment72041244_39250452
>>> > and such discussions are likely to occur whenever you bring it up with
>>> someone
>>> > who cares a lot about futures :-)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbono...@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch from Guava futures vs Java 8 futures

[Holden Karau]

For what it's worth there exists a relatively easy Java8 to Scala future
conversion so this shouldn't cause an issue on the Spark runner.

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:22 PM, Alexey Romanenko 
wrote:

> +1, sounds great!
>
> Regards,
> Alexey
>
>
> On 2 Feb 2018, at 07:14, Thomas Weise  wrote:
>
> +1
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 02/01/2018 07:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Luke, Thomas, and I had some in-person discussions about the use of
>> Java 8
>> > futures and Guava futures in the portability support code. I wanted to
>> bring our
>> > thoughts to the dev list for feedback.
>> >
>> > As background:
>> >
>> >  - Java 5+ "Future" lacks the main purpose of future, which is async
>> chaining.
>> >  - Guava introduced ListenableFuture to do real future-oriented
>> programming
>> >  - Java 8 added CompletionStage which is more-or-less the expected
>> interface
>> >
>> > It is still debatable whether Java got it right [1]. But since it is
>> > standardized, doesn't need to be shaded, etc, it is worth trying to
>> just use it
>> > carefully in the right ways. So we thought to propose that we migrate
>> most uses
>> > of Guava futures to Java 8 futures.
>> >
>> > What do you think? Have we missed an important problem that would make
>> this a
>> > deal-breaker?
>> >
>> > Kenn
>> >
>> > [1]
>> > e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38744943/listenable
>> future-vs-completablefuture#comment72041244_39250452
>> > and such discussions are likely to occur whenever you bring it up with
>> someone
>> > who cares a lot about futures :-)
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbono...@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
>
>


-- 
Twitter: https://twitter.com/holdenkarau

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch from Guava futures vs Java 8 futures

[Alexey Romanenko]

+1, sounds great!

Regards,
Alexey

> On 2 Feb 2018, at 07:14, Thomas Weise  wrote:
> 
> +1
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré  > wrote:
> +1
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On 02/01/2018 07:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Luke, Thomas, and I had some in-person discussions about the use of Java 8
> > futures and Guava futures in the portability support code. I wanted to 
> > bring our
> > thoughts to the dev list for feedback.
> >
> > As background:
> >
> >  - Java 5+ "Future" lacks the main purpose of future, which is async 
> > chaining.
> >  - Guava introduced ListenableFuture to do real future-oriented programming
> >  - Java 8 added CompletionStage which is more-or-less the expected interface
> >  
> > It is still debatable whether Java got it right [1]. But since it is
> > standardized, doesn't need to be shaded, etc, it is worth trying to just 
> > use it
> > carefully in the right ways. So we thought to propose that we migrate most 
> > uses
> > of Guava futures to Java 8 futures.
> >
> > What do you think? Have we missed an important problem that would make this 
> > a
> > deal-breaker?
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > [1]
> > e.g. 
> > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38744943/listenablefuture-vs-completablefuture#comment72041244_39250452
> >  
> > 
> > and such discussions are likely to occur whenever you bring it up with 
> > someone
> > who cares a lot about futures :-)
> 
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org 
> http://blog.nanthrax.net 
> Talend - http://www.talend.com 
> 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch from Guava futures vs Java 8 futures

[Thomas Weise]

+1


On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré 
wrote:

> +1
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 02/01/2018 07:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Luke, Thomas, and I had some in-person discussions about the use of Java
> 8
> > futures and Guava futures in the portability support code. I wanted to
> bring our
> > thoughts to the dev list for feedback.
> >
> > As background:
> >
> >  - Java 5+ "Future" lacks the main purpose of future, which is async
> chaining.
> >  - Guava introduced ListenableFuture to do real future-oriented
> programming
> >  - Java 8 added CompletionStage which is more-or-less the expected
> interface
> >
> > It is still debatable whether Java got it right [1]. But since it is
> > standardized, doesn't need to be shaded, etc, it is worth trying to just
> use it
> > carefully in the right ways. So we thought to propose that we migrate
> most uses
> > of Guava futures to Java 8 futures.
> >
> > What do you think? Have we missed an important problem that would make
> this a
> > deal-breaker?
> >
> > Kenn
> >
> > [1]
> > e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38744943/listenablefuture-vs-
> completablefuture#comment72041244_39250452
> > and such discussions are likely to occur whenever you bring it up with
> someone
> > who cares a lot about futures :-)
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbono...@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch from Guava futures vs Java 8 futures

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

+1

Regards
JB

On 02/01/2018 07:54 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Luke, Thomas, and I had some in-person discussions about the use of Java 8
> futures and Guava futures in the portability support code. I wanted to bring 
> our
> thoughts to the dev list for feedback.
> 
> As background:
> 
>  - Java 5+ "Future" lacks the main purpose of future, which is async chaining.
>  - Guava introduced ListenableFuture to do real future-oriented programming
>  - Java 8 added CompletionStage which is more-or-less the expected interface
>  
> It is still debatable whether Java got it right [1]. But since it is
> standardized, doesn't need to be shaded, etc, it is worth trying to just use 
> it
> carefully in the right ways. So we thought to propose that we migrate most 
> uses
> of Guava futures to Java 8 futures.
> 
> What do you think? Have we missed an important problem that would make this a
> deal-breaker?
> 
> Kenn
> 
> [1]
> e.g. 
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38744943/listenablefuture-vs-completablefuture#comment72041244_39250452
> and such discussions are likely to occur whenever you bring it up with someone
> who cares a lot about futures :-)

-- 
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbono...@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch from Guava futures vs Java 8 futures

[Ismaël Mejía]

+1

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 9:53 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau
 wrote:
> +1 indeed
>
> Le 1 févr. 2018 21:34, "Eugene Kirpichov"  a écrit :
>>
>> Reducing dependency on Guava in favor of something Java-standard sounds
>> great, +1.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:53 AM Reuven Lax  wrote:
>>>
>>> Unless there's something that doesn't work in Java 8 future, +1 to
>>> migrating.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:54 AM, Kenneth Knowles  wrote:

 Hi all,

 Luke, Thomas, and I had some in-person discussions about the use of Java
 8 futures and Guava futures in the portability support code. I wanted to
 bring our thoughts to the dev list for feedback.

 As background:

  - Java 5+ "Future" lacks the main purpose of future, which is async
 chaining.
  - Guava introduced ListenableFuture to do real future-oriented
 programming
  - Java 8 added CompletionStage which is more-or-less the expected
 interface

 It is still debatable whether Java got it right [1]. But since it is
 standardized, doesn't need to be shaded, etc, it is worth trying to just 
 use
 it carefully in the right ways. So we thought to propose that we migrate
 most uses of Guava futures to Java 8 futures.

 What do you think? Have we missed an important problem that would make
 this a deal-breaker?

 Kenn

 [1] e.g.
 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38744943/listenablefuture-vs-completablefuture#comment72041244_39250452
 and such discussions are likely to occur whenever you bring it up with
 someone who cares a lot about futures :-)
>>>
>>>
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch from Guava futures vs Java 8 futures

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

+1 indeed

Le 1 févr. 2018 21:34, "Eugene Kirpichov"  a écrit :

> Reducing dependency on Guava in favor of something Java-standard sounds
> great, +1.
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:53 AM Reuven Lax  wrote:
>
>> Unless there's something that doesn't work in Java 8 future, +1 to
>> migrating.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:54 AM, Kenneth Knowles  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Luke, Thomas, and I had some in-person discussions about the use of Java
>>> 8 futures and Guava futures in the portability support code. I wanted to
>>> bring our thoughts to the dev list for feedback.
>>>
>>> As background:
>>>
>>>  - Java 5+ "Future" lacks the main purpose of future, which is async
>>> chaining.
>>>  - Guava introduced ListenableFuture to do real future-oriented
>>> programming
>>>  - Java 8 added CompletionStage which is more-or-less the expected
>>> interface
>>>
>>> It is still debatable whether Java got it right [1]. But since it is
>>> standardized, doesn't need to be shaded, etc, it is worth trying to just
>>> use it carefully in the right ways. So we thought to propose that we
>>> migrate most uses of Guava futures to Java 8 futures.
>>>
>>> What do you think? Have we missed an important problem that would make
>>> this a deal-breaker?
>>>
>>> Kenn
>>>
>>> [1] e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38744943/
>>> listenablefuture-vs-completablefuture#comment72041244_39250452 and such
>>> discussions are likely to occur whenever you bring it up with someone who
>>> cares a lot about futures :-)
>>>
>>
>>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch from Guava futures vs Java 8 futures

[Eugene Kirpichov]

Reducing dependency on Guava in favor of something Java-standard sounds
great, +1.

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:53 AM Reuven Lax  wrote:

> Unless there's something that doesn't work in Java 8 future, +1 to
> migrating.
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:54 AM, Kenneth Knowles  wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Luke, Thomas, and I had some in-person discussions about the use of Java
>> 8 futures and Guava futures in the portability support code. I wanted to
>> bring our thoughts to the dev list for feedback.
>>
>> As background:
>>
>>  - Java 5+ "Future" lacks the main purpose of future, which is async
>> chaining.
>>  - Guava introduced ListenableFuture to do real future-oriented
>> programming
>>  - Java 8 added CompletionStage which is more-or-less the expected
>> interface
>>
>> It is still debatable whether Java got it right [1]. But since it is
>> standardized, doesn't need to be shaded, etc, it is worth trying to just
>> use it carefully in the right ways. So we thought to propose that we
>> migrate most uses of Guava futures to Java 8 futures.
>>
>> What do you think? Have we missed an important problem that would make
>> this a deal-breaker?
>>
>> Kenn
>>
>> [1] e.g.
>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38744943/listenablefuture-vs-completablefuture#comment72041244_39250452
>> and such discussions are likely to occur whenever you bring it up with
>> someone who cares a lot about futures :-)
>>
>
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Switch from Guava futures vs Java 8 futures

[Reuven Lax]

Unless there's something that doesn't work in Java 8 future, +1 to
migrating.

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:54 AM, Kenneth Knowles  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Luke, Thomas, and I had some in-person discussions about the use of Java 8
> futures and Guava futures in the portability support code. I wanted to
> bring our thoughts to the dev list for feedback.
>
> As background:
>
>  - Java 5+ "Future" lacks the main purpose of future, which is async
> chaining.
>  - Guava introduced ListenableFuture to do real future-oriented programming
>  - Java 8 added CompletionStage which is more-or-less the expected
> interface
>
> It is still debatable whether Java got it right [1]. But since it is
> standardized, doesn't need to be shaded, etc, it is worth trying to just
> use it carefully in the right ways. So we thought to propose that we
> migrate most uses of Guava futures to Java 8 futures.
>
> What do you think? Have we missed an important problem that would make
> this a deal-breaker?
>
> Kenn
>
> [1] e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38744943/listenablefuture-vs-
> completablefuture#comment72041244_39250452 and such discussions are
> likely to occur whenever you bring it up with someone who cares a lot about
> futures :-)
>