You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hama.apache.org by "Edward J. Yoon" <ed...@apache.org> on 2011/05/17 07:08:05 UTC
Setter of message
Hi
Should we add setter to BSPMessage?
Sent from my iPhone
Re: Setter of message
Posted by Tommaso Teofili <to...@gmail.com>.
I agree, a BSPMessage should be kept immutable.
Tommaso
2011/5/17 Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> > My understanding is that immutable object has some advantages such as
> thread safety in the concurrent computation environment. So basically I
> prefer immutable object to mutable one.
>
> I agree w/ you.
>
> I just wanted to know whether there's some particular case, requires setter
> to avoid creating objects.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 2011. 5. 17., at 오후 2:46, "ChiaHung Lin" <ch...@nuk.edu.tw> wrote:
>
> > Is there any reason that we have to allow the state change of BSPMessage?
> >
> > My understanding is that immutable object has some advantages such as
> thread safety in the concurrent computation environment. So basically I
> prefer immutable object to mutable one.
> >
> > But maybe some scenario that prevent us from constructing immutable
> BSPMessage?
> >
> > -----Original message-----
> > From:Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> > To:hama-dev <ha...@incubator.apache.org>
> > Date:Tue, 17 May 2011 14:08:05 +0900
> > Subject:Setter of message
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > Should we add setter to BSPMessage?
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >
> > --
> > ChiaHung Lin
> > Department of Information Management
> > National University of Kaohsiung
> > Taiwan
>
Re: Setter of message
Posted by "Edward J. Yoon" <ed...@apache.org>.
> My understanding is that immutable object has some advantages such as thread safety in the concurrent computation environment. So basically I prefer immutable object to mutable one.
I agree w/ you.
I just wanted to know whether there's some particular case, requires setter to avoid creating objects.
Sent from my iPhone
On 2011. 5. 17., at 오후 2:46, "ChiaHung Lin" <ch...@nuk.edu.tw> wrote:
> Is there any reason that we have to allow the state change of BSPMessage?
>
> My understanding is that immutable object has some advantages such as thread safety in the concurrent computation environment. So basically I prefer immutable object to mutable one.
>
> But maybe some scenario that prevent us from constructing immutable BSPMessage?
>
> -----Original message-----
> From:Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
> To:hama-dev <ha...@incubator.apache.org>
> Date:Tue, 17 May 2011 14:08:05 +0900
> Subject:Setter of message
>
> Hi
>
> Should we add setter to BSPMessage?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> --
> ChiaHung Lin
> Department of Information Management
> National University of Kaohsiung
> Taiwan
Re: Setter of message
Posted by ChiaHung Lin <ch...@nuk.edu.tw>.
Is there any reason that we have to allow the state change of BSPMessage?
My understanding is that immutable object has some advantages such as thread safety in the concurrent computation environment. So basically I prefer immutable object to mutable one.
But maybe some scenario that prevent us from constructing immutable BSPMessage?
-----Original message-----
From:Edward J. Yoon <ed...@apache.org>
To:hama-dev <ha...@incubator.apache.org>
Date:Tue, 17 May 2011 14:08:05 +0900
Subject:Setter of message
Hi
Should we add setter to BSPMessage?
Sent from my iPhone
--
ChiaHung Lin
Department of Information Management
National University of Kaohsiung
Taiwan