Open DomGarguilo opened 8 months ago
Looking at the amount of code that has changed in this PR, it's not much at all. I think all we have done here is remove an interface which makes clear based on the name of the method and argument how it's used and replaced it with a generic object that is unclear. Because of that we have to try and explain to the user what they should implement in javadoc based on how it's going to be used. I'm not sold on the fact that we should make this change.
Looking at the amount of code that has changed in this PR, it's not much at all. I think all we have done here is remove an interface which makes clear based on the name of the method and argument how it's used and replaced it with a generic object that is unclear. Because of that we have to try and explain to the user what they should implement in javadoc based on how it's going to be used. I'm not sold on the fact that we should make this change.
Makes sense to me. I can go ahead and close this PR for now.
The ticket also mentioned:
could at least extend Predicate
with a default method, so either way of calling could be used
Does anyone have an opinion on whether this might be worth it or not? I am fine with just closing this PR and the ticket but just wanted to explore all the ideas mentioned in the ticket.
@DomGarguilo - I'm going to take @keith-turner 's thumbs up to my comment to mean that he agrees with me. Given that the issue was created by @ctubbsii, maybe leave this open and un-merged to see if he has any thoughts.
If Authorizer is kept, then it should have the @FunctionalInterface
annotation to signify intent and make sure that intent is not changed in the future. Since Authorizer is currently a functional interface its very easy to assign a predicate to it.
Fixes #57