[jira] [Commented] (FLINK-23978) FieldAccessor has direct scala dependency

["Alexey Novakov (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-23978?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17703657#comment-17703657 ] 

Alexey Novakov commented on FLINK-23978:
----------------------------------------

[~chesnay] 

This solution requires 
{code:java}
"org.apache.flink" % "flink-streaming-scala_2.12" % flinkVersion{code}
to be added in my Flink Scala 2.13 or 3 Job runtime.
It feels a little bit strange for a user project to have Scala 3 or 2.13 as a main compile version, but in the same time *flink-streaming-scala* has to be added into project depencies with *"_2.12"* suffix because we need _DefaultScalaProductFieldAccessorFactory_ on the classpath. 
 
Although this is just a naming/packaging point, I am wondering if it would it be better to place this single class into a new Flink maven module like "flink-scala-product" or so?

> FieldAccessor has direct scala dependency
> -----------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: FLINK-23978
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-23978
>             Project: Flink
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: API / DataStream
>            Reporter: Chesnay Schepler
>            Assignee: Chesnay Schepler
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>             Fix For: 1.15.0
>
>
> The FieldAccessor class in flink-streaming-java has a hard dependency on scala. It would be ideal if we could restrict this dependencies to flink-streaming-scala.
> We could move the SimpleProductFieldAccessor & RecursiveProductFieldAccessor to flink-streaming-scala, and load them in the FieldAccessorFactory via reflection.
> This is one of a few steps that would allow the Java Datastream API to be used without scala being on the classpath.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)