Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

On 25 May 2017 at 09:00, Sebastian Laskawiec wrote: > Adding part of your email from REST refactoring thread: > > Looking into the code, without considering performance at all, I think >> that you've become too ecstatic about Optionals. These should be used as >> return

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

I'm not an Infinispan developer, but I'll chime in anyway. :) I've never been a fan of Optional. But the theory behind it that made it acceptable in the first place is that it generally gets optimized away. Now this theory is only true if you never hold a reference to it in any persistent

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

> On 25 May 2017, at 10:00, Sebastian Laskawiec wrote: > . As it turns out we can use Optionals anywhere, except method returning some > objects which are not getters. You can't use it on non getter return types ? Why ? > > It is also worth to say that both gentlemen

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

Indeed Bela, you're an extreme naysayer! :) I'm actually trying to get as many comments and arguments out of this discussion. I hope we will be able to iron out a general recommendation or approach how we want to treat Optionals. On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:14 PM Bela Ban

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

I haven't checked Sebastian's refactored code, but does it use Optionals as a *field* type? That's misuse (same as using it as an arg), it's intended solely as method return type. Radim On 05/23/2017 05:45 PM, Katia Aresti wrote: > Dan, I disagree with point 2 where you say "You now have a

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

Actually, I'm an extreme naysayer! I actually voiced concerns so I'm wondering where your assumption there are no naysayers is coming from... :-) On 23/05/17 1:54 PM, Sebastian Laskawiec wrote: > Hey! > > So I think we have no extreme naysayers to Optional. So let me try to > sum up what we

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

+1 to Dan's opinion On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Dan Berindei wrote: > I wouldn't say I'm an extreme naysayer, but I do have 2 issues with > Optional: > > 1. Performance becomes harder to quantify: the allocations may or may not > be eliminated, and a change in one

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

Dan, I disagree with point 2 where you say "You now have a field that could be null, Optional.empty(), or Optional.of(something)" This is the point of optional. You shouldn't have a field that has these 3 possible values, just two of them = Some or None. If the field is mutable, it should be

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

I wouldn't say I'm an extreme naysayer, but I do have 2 issues with Optional: 1. Performance becomes harder to quantify: the allocations may or may not be eliminated, and a change in one part of the code may change how allocations are eliminated in a completely different part of the code. 2. My

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

Hey! So I think we have no extreme naysayers to Optional. So let me try to sum up what we have achieved so: - In macroscale benchmark based on REST interface using Optionals didn't lower the performance. - +1 for using it in public APIs, especially for those using functional style.

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

I think Sanne's right here, any differences in such large scale test are hard to decipher. Also, as mentioned in a previous email, my view on its usage is same as Sanne's: * Definitely in APIs/SPIs. * Be gentle with it internals. Cheers, -- Galder Zamarreño Infinispan, Red Hat > On 18 May

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

Hi Sebastian, sorry but I think you've been wasting time, I hope it was fun :) This is not the right methodology to "settle" the matter (unless you want Radim's eyes to get bloody..). Any change in such a complex system will only affect the performance metrics if you're actually addressing the

Re: [infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

Hi Sebastien, First thing to say, you impress me with all this work ! Thank you very much ! I've been working with Scala for almost three years, and I really appreciate the functional code style. This involves the use of Optionals among other things you mention like map, flapMap etc. Looking at

[infinispan-dev] To Optional or not to Optional?

Hey! In our past we had a couple of discussions about whether we should or should not use Optionals [1][2]. The main argument against it was performance. On one hand we risk additional object allocation (the Optional itself) and wrong inlining decisions taken by C2 compiler [3]. On the other