cmccabe commented on PR #13280:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/13280#issuecomment-1500597366
It's messy to have to go through a conversion function to use standard
interfaces. The fact that we have to do it in Scala is a big negative for
Scala. I'm greatly looking forward to no longer having to do this once we get
rid of Scala. I would like to never again have to convert between (or ponder
the difference between) a `collections.Seq` and a `collections.immutable.Seq`,
or a scala map versus a java map.
Also, as you yourself argued, converting back to java.util.Map loses type
safety, since now we don't know if we have a persistent map or not. It is quite
useful to know that your map is immutable, even if I doubt that confusion
between regular types and persistent ones will be as common as you suggest.
Most importantly, I don't think the delta between a wrapper type that
implements java.util.Map and one that doesn't is that big. Like I said earlier,
we did this in TimelineHashMap and other places. While I'd prefer to not have
wrappers, if we must have them they should not require downcasting to be
useful. If you want I can raise a PR to implement the standard interfaces.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jira-unsubscr...@kafka.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
