#11 Cleaning redis service and adding ttl getter method

Samengevoegd
jonathan heeft 4 commits samengevoegd van kris/refactor_redis_service naar master 4 jaren geleden
kris commented 4 jaren geleden
Er is nog geen inhoud.
kris titel aangepast van WIP: (testing) Cleaning redis service naar Cleaning redis service adn adding ttl getter method 4 jaren geleden
kris commented 4 jaren geleden
Poster

@jonathan please review

@jonathan please review
jonathan was toegekend door kris 4 jaren geleden
kris titel aangepast van Cleaning redis service adn adding ttl getter method naar Cleaning redis service and adding ttl getter method 4 jaren geleden
jonathan commented 4 jaren geleden
Eigenaar

@kris -- Things that make me wary:

  • use of var in a low-level library. The lower you go, the more explicit types should be. Why introduce another potential source of errors? Can we remove var and replace with class names?
  • use of streams/lambdas/collecting and in general anywhere we are now creating new objects when we could have avoided it. low level libraries should generally prefer for-loops and static classes. Can you review and avoid using stream methods and allocating new objects where possible?

Please give me a heads-up in advance before refactoring more library code. With the above changes I will merge this, but frankly I don’t see a big benefit given the risk. If we had more comprehensive test coverage I would feel better about the risk.

@kris -- Things that make me wary: * use of `var` in a low-level library. The lower you go, the more explicit types should be. Why introduce another potential source of errors? Can we remove `var` and replace with class names? * use of streams/lambdas/collecting and in general anywhere we are now creating new objects when we could have avoided it. low level libraries should generally prefer for-loops and static classes. Can you review and avoid using stream methods and allocating new objects where possible? Please give me a heads-up in advance before refactoring more library code. With the above changes I will merge this, but frankly I don't see a big benefit given the risk. If we had more comprehensive test coverage I would feel better about the risk.
kris commented 4 jaren geleden
Poster
  • Removing var (only String was replaced in 5ish places, so it was easy) - agree, sorry
  • stream/lambda/collect is used just in 1 place - method prefix(Collection<String>). In master (current version) following is used transform(keys, o -> prefix(o.toString())) - so lambda is there also. I did some perfomance test on this, and the new solution worked 2x faster at least on collections with 10.000 Strings. Please confirm you really want apache’s transform method back. Or maybe to just change all this and use plain for loop with another collection created as output?
- Removing var (only String was replaced in 5ish places, so it was easy) - agree, sorry - stream/lambda/collect is used just in 1 place - method `prefix(Collection<String>)`. In master (current version) following is used `transform(keys, o -> prefix(o.toString()))` - so lambda is there also. I did some perfomance test on this, and the new solution worked 2x faster at least on collections with 10.000 Strings. Please confirm you really want apache's transform method back. Or maybe to just change all this and use plain for loop with another collection created as output?
jonathan heeft deze pull request gesloten 4 jaren geleden
jonathan heeft 4 jaren geleden de branch kris/refactor_redis_service verwijderd.
The pull request has been merged as 5d199cbd98.
Log in om deel te nemen aan deze discussie.
Geen beoordelaars
Geen label
Geen mijlpaal
Niet toegewezen
2 deelnemers
Notificaties
Vervaldatum

Geen vervaldatum ingesteld.

Afhankelijkheden

Deze pull-aanvraag heeft momenteel geen afhankelijkheden.

Laden…
Er is nog geen inhoud.