You’re thinking about a pure implementation play, correct? RxJava or the Reactive Stream constructs would not be exposed to the user as API. Am I correct? Also for posterity, we had backchannel chats about it and you said you felt vert.x was not necessarily addressing your needs. Could you elaborate a bit here?
Emmanuel > On 15 Jun 2017, at 23:20, William Burns <mudokon...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I was thinking more about [1] and I find that I was going to implement > basically reactive streams. What we have now in github is similar but it uses > a very crude method of blocking the thread to prevent back pressure. This can > then cause severe issues as many users have found out when they don't close > iterator. > > Unfortunately reactive streams is just a spec. I am proposing to add RxJava > [2] as a dependency [2] in the core module to provide access to reactive > streams and the various conversion methods. This library adds a bunch of > support for built in back pressure, transformations and much more which would > reduce the amount of code I would need to write substantially. > > In regards to timing, I am thinking this is too close for 9.1, so maybe 9.2 > or higher. > > What do you guys think? > > [1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-7865 > <https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-7865> > [2] https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJava <https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJava> > [3] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/io.reactivex.rxjava2/rxjava/2.1.0 > <https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/io.reactivex.rxjava2/rxjava/2.1.0>_______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
_______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
