Bug 4791

Summary: SPEC - Should we refine the StepExecution<?> parameter reference ?
Product: jbatch Reporter: ScottKurz
Component: sourceAssignee: cvignola
Status: RESOLVED FIXED    
Severity: enhancement CC: issues, mminella
Priority: P5    
Version: 1   
Target Milestone: ---   
Hardware: PC   
OS: Windows   
Whiteboard:

Description ScottKurz 2013-03-13 17:50:30 UTC
Should this signature:

  public List<StepExecution<?>> getStepExecutions(long jobExecutionId) throws NoSuchJobExecutionException, JobSecurityException;

be:
  public List<StepExecution<? extends Serializable>> getStepExecutions
Comment 1 mminella 2013-03-14 18:20:02 UTC
What is the type parameter on this for?  Why would a StepExecution have a type?
Comment 2 cvignola 2013-03-16 21:40:31 UTC
I think we should redefine the user persistent data to be Map<String,? extends Serializable>, which will eliminate the need for the parameterized type in StepExecution.
Comment 3 ScottKurz 2013-03-16 22:06:26 UTC
Please see my comment on Bug 4776 about switching to a Map.   I don't see that this is so valuable to incur this extra work..
Comment 4 cvignola 2013-03-20 16:21:11 UTC
The parameterized types are not helpful.  They're coming off.  In PFD v1.7.