Re: IgniteFuture adapters

2017-03-27 Thread Sergei Egorov
True, I just prefer functional style over static methods. Regarding "why should this method be a part of the future API" - why not? It helps to chain such calls instead of call nesting. Of course, if Java had extension methods it wouldn't be needed, but we don't have them. On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 a

Re: IgniteFuture adapters

2017-03-27 Thread Vladimir Ozerov
+1 to Alex, this is something external to IgniteFuture. Should Ignite was implemented in .NET, we could have add proposed feature it using extension methods. But (un)fortunately Ignite is Java-based :-) On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Alexey Goncharuk < alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote: > Serg

Re: IgniteFuture adapters

2017-03-27 Thread Alexey Goncharuk
Sergei, Why should this method be a part of the future API? The only implementation will do "return func(this);" I can achieve the same result the following way: rx(compute.runAsync(runnable)).timeout(5_000).subscribe(); 2017-03-27 15:54 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov : > Take a look at my initial c

Re: IgniteFuture adapters

2017-03-27 Thread Sergei Egorov
Take a look at my initial code. public IgniteFuture chain(IgniteClosure, T> doneCb); vs public R to(IgniteClosure, R> transformer); The result of "chain" is IgniteFuture. The result of "to" is the object returned from transformer. It would be CompletableFuture, Rx's Observable, Reactor's Mo

Re: IgniteFuture adapters

2017-03-27 Thread Дмитрий Рябов
Em... When you get result of your future, closure will produce new future with completely different type. 2017-03-27 13:43 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov : > It doesn't :) > > It returns another IgniteFuture where I want to transform it to completely > different type. > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 1:41 PM

Re: IgniteFuture adapters

2017-03-27 Thread Sergei Egorov
It doesn't :) It returns another IgniteFuture where I want to transform it to completely different type. On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 1:41 PM Дмитрий Рябов wrote: > IgniteFuture have method > > public IgniteFuture chain(IgniteClosure, T> > doneCb); > > which do this. > > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00

Re: IgniteFuture adapters

2017-03-27 Thread Дмитрий Рябов
IgniteFuture have method public IgniteFuture chain(IgniteClosure, T> doneCb); which do this. 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov : > Hi! > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable method: > > public R to(Function, R> transformer) > > it will allow to chai

IgniteFuture adapters

2017-03-27 Thread Sergei Egorov
Hi! Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable method: public R to(Function, R> transformer) it will allow to chain it like: compute.runAsync(runnable).to(rx()).timeout(5_000).subscribe() Where rx() is just a static function with something like: public sta