-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.3k
add: support for the execution thread control #791
add: support for the execution thread control #791
Conversation
|
I'm not sure if it's overkill or not, because the developer should be aware of it's own code. But, why not. It could be useful for a big team :) However, I'll review this for 3.1.
|
|
Actually, for big projects with intensive networking and wide set of database operations, like messengers, it is very usefull - you don't need synchronization, volatile, reentrant locks, etc in most cases, but still able to have a good decomposed beans with strong restictions. And yes, for teams greater then 3 developer, it makes much easely to review code for inconsistent operations. As for your preferences about opening an issue, of course I'll follow it in the future. |
|
👍 on this feature. I just ran into a problem which i could discover much more easily with this. |
|
ok, I'll make a PR in a few days
|
|
You just have to update this one :) |
|
oh, true ))
|
|
I've renewed the PR, please check it out. |
…method was modified because of another annotation
|
any progress here? |
|
Guys? |
|
Good job 👍 Thanks for this PR |
|
I think the new annotations definitely need better JavaDoc and example in it (one even has a TODO comment). Also the wiki should be updated. |
|
Oops I didn't see the TODO in javadoc.. |
|
@Artyomcool you should add JavaDoc to all your annotations in a follow-up commit. Also wiki pages should be created for these annotations. I would create the wiki, but i never used these feature before, and also i think the creator can understand and explain it most clearly. |
|
JavaDocs is not my strongest side. But I'll do my bests. |
|
Please check the #1121 for possible typos and maybe a grammar - I'm not an English native speaker. |
|
I updated the wiki page based on your JavaDocs. |
Hi,
I have already described my intention in pull request #780, but just realized that the I've pull-requested directly from the develop branch.