#11 Cleaning redis service and adding ttl getter method

已合併
jonathan 4 年之前 將 4 次代碼提交從 kris/refactor_redis_service合併至 master
尚未有任何內容
kris changed title from WIP: (testing) Cleaning redis service to Cleaning redis service adn adding ttl getter method 4 年之前
kris 評論 4 年之前
發佈者

@jonathan please review

@jonathan please review
jonathankris 4 年之前指派
kris changed title from Cleaning redis service adn adding ttl getter method to Cleaning redis service and adding ttl getter method 4 年之前
jonathan 評論 4 年之前
所有者

@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 評論 4 年之前
發佈者
  • 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 closed this pull request 4 年之前
jonathan 刪除分支 kris/refactor_redis_service 4 年之前
The pull request has been merged as 5d199cbd98.
登入 才能加入這對話。
No reviewers
未選擇標籤
未選擇里程碑
No Assignees
2 參與者
訊息
截止日期

未設定截止日期。

Dependencies

This pull request currently doesn't have any dependencies.

Loading…
尚未有任何內容