IgniteFuture adapters

[Sergei Egorov]

Hi!

Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable method:

    public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()


WDYT?

[Dmitrii Ryabov]

IgniteFuture have method

public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super IgniteFuture<V>, T>
doneCb);

which do this.

2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:

> Hi!
>
> Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable method:
>
>     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()
>
>
> WDYT?
>

2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:

> Hi!
>
> Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable method:
>
>     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()
>
>
> WDYT?
>

[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 <[hidden email]> wrote:

> IgniteFuture have method
>
> public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super IgniteFuture<V>, T>
> doneCb);
>
> which do this.
>
> 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable
> method:
> >
> >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()
> >
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
>
>
> 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable
> method:
> >
> >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()
> >
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
>

[Dmitrii Ryabov]

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 <[hidden email]>:

> 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 <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > IgniteFuture have method
> >
> > public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super IgniteFuture<V>,
> T>
> > doneCb);
> >
> > which do this.
> >
> > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable
> > method:
> > >
> > >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()
> > >
> > >
> > > WDYT?
> > >
> >
> >
> > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable
> > method:
> > >
> > >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()
> > >
> > >
> > > WDYT?
> > >
> >
>

[Sergei Egorov]

Take a look at my initial code.

public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super
IgniteFuture<V>, T> doneCb);

vs

public <R> R to(IgniteClosure<? super IgniteFuture<V>, 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 Mono, etc...


On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 3:18 PM Дмитрий Рябов <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 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 <[hidden email]>:
>
> > 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 <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > IgniteFuture have method
> > >
> > > public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super IgniteFuture<V>,
> > T>
> > > doneCb);
> > >
> > > which do this.
> > >
> > > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable
> > > method:
> > > >
> > > >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > WDYT?
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable
> > > method:
> > > >
> > > >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > WDYT?
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[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 <[hidden email]>:

> Take a look at my initial code.
>
> public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super
> IgniteFuture<V>, T> doneCb);
>
> vs
>
> public <R> R to(IgniteClosure<? super IgniteFuture<V>, 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 Mono, etc...
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 3:18 PM Дмитрий Рябов <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > 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 <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > 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 <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > IgniteFuture have method
> > > >
> > > > public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super
> IgniteFuture<V>,
> > > T>
> > > > doneCb);
> > > >
> > > > which do this.
> > > >
> > > > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi!
> > > > >
> > > > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable
> > > > method:
> > > > >
> > > > >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > WDYT?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi!
> > > > >
> > > > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very usable
> > > > method:
> > > > >
> > > > >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>> rx()
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > WDYT?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[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 <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> 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 <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Take a look at my initial code.
> >
> > public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super
> > IgniteFuture<V>, T> doneCb);
> >
> > vs
> >
> > public <R> R to(IgniteClosure<? super IgniteFuture<V>, 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 Mono, etc...
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 3:18 PM Дмитрий Рябов <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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 <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > > 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 <[hidden email]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > IgniteFuture have method
> > > > >
> > > > > public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super
> > IgniteFuture<V>,
> > > > T>
> > > > > doneCb);
> > > > >
> > > > > which do this.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very
> usable
> > > > > method:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>>
> rx()
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > WDYT?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very
> usable
> > > > > method:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>>
> rx()
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > WDYT?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[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 at 4:06 PM Alexey Goncharuk <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> 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 <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Take a look at my initial code.
> >
> > public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super
> > IgniteFuture<V>, T> doneCb);
> >
> > vs
> >
> > public <R> R to(IgniteClosure<? super IgniteFuture<V>, 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 Mono, etc...
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 3:18 PM Дмитрий Рябов <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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 <[hidden email]>:
> > >
> > > > 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 <[hidden email]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > IgniteFuture have method
> > > > >
> > > > > public <T> IgniteFuture<T> chain(IgniteClosure<? super
> > IgniteFuture<V>,
> > > > T>
> > > > > doneCb);
> > > > >
> > > > > which do this.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very
> usable
> > > > > method:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>>
> rx()
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > WDYT?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2017-03-27 13:30 GMT+03:00 Sergei Egorov <[hidden email]>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Would be nice if igniteFuture would provide a small but very
> usable
> > > > > method:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     public <R> R to(Function<IgniteFuture<T>, 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 static <T> Function<IgniteFuture<T>, Observable<T>>
> rx()
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > WDYT?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>