Rehabilitate scala.Responder?

[Arnold deVos]

scala.Responder pretends to be a core scala type but in reality it is a washed-up has-been. The new and sleek scala.concurent.Future just ignores Responder. Perhaps that is because Responder is an abstract class when it really needs to be a trait.  

Rather than eventually deprecating scala.Responder would it be reasonable to change it to a trait and make it base of scala.concurent.Future (as well as the old scala.actors.Future)? Responder expresses a useful concept, simpler than Future, and it could be a bridge between different asynchronous  programming systems.

- Arnold

[√iktor Ҡlang]

On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Arnold deVos <adv.la...@gmail.com> wrote:

scala.Responder pretends to be a core scala type but in reality it is a washed-up has-been. The new and sleek scala.concurent.Future just ignores Responder. Perhaps that is because Responder is an abstract class when it really needs to be a trait.  

I didn't even know that Responder existed. I've never seen anyone using it.

 

Rather than eventually deprecating scala.Responder would it be reasonable to change it to a trait and make it base of scala.concurent.Future (as well as the old scala.actors.Future)? Responder expresses a useful concept, simpler than Future, and it could be a bridge between different asynchronous  programming systems.

That wouldn't solve the problem since the Java ecosystem wouldn't be using it anyway.

A lot of async libs written in Java would be a terrible shame to leave out of the equation.

Cheers,

√

 

- Arnold

--
Viktor Klang

Akka Tech Lead

Typesafe - The software stack for applications that scale

Twitter: @viktorklang

[Alec Zorab]

I used it extensively for a couple of years at my last job, after being pointed to it in this thread thread on SO: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2705132/can-i-transform-this-asynchronous-java-network-api-into-a-monadic-representation

I'm not sure why the OP might think it's going to be deprecated though?

[Arnold deVos]

I have also used in a number of projects to mark asynchronous objects. Mainly because it was there and already defined as a "core" type, much as you would inherit Function1 if creating a function-like object. I am only speculating that it will be eventually deprecated since its only user in the standard library is also on the way out.

[Chris Marshall]

I use Responder :-s

C