Github user koeninger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/13998
Sure... the most trivial example of how that would break at runtime is that
I already created an implementation that defines that method, with the opposite
semantics. Is that particularly likely for that exact case you bring up? No.
But the point is that binary compatibility is not a magic bullet.
It's also not cost free. At least one other cost of an abstract class as
opposed to an interface is that you have to have a constructor, so you cannot
implement multiple abstract classes in one instance.
As you say, whether to use the ability to add methods is a decision to be
made in the future, so I'll go ahead and make the change and defer the
discussion until it actually becomes necessary.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
