This version (2017/05/27 13:44) is a draft.
Approvals: 0/1

[00:25:13] * ChanServ sets mode: +o purplefox [01:53:53] * ChanServ sets mode: +o purplefox

[07:22:07] <voidDotClass> what's the latest version on maven?

[09:01:37] * ChanServ sets mode: +o purplefox [09:11:53] <amr> i think i know the answer to this, but do message codecs work on fields on other objects? [09:12:14] <amr> i.e. i have a pojo with a JsonObject, will the JsonObject messagecodec get triggered? [09:12:17] <amr> i expect/suspect not [10:07:08] * ChanServ sets mode: +o purplefox

[10:13:56] <amr> hmm, going from jsonobject → string using Json.encode() is straightforward, going the other way using Json.decodeValue and then calling new JsonObject() is a bit fiddly

[10:14:08] <amr> any reason readValue can't just inflate the JsonObject rdirectly?

[10:14:47] * ChanServ sets mode: +o purplefox [10:15:39] <pmlopes> amr you can also do new JsonObject(String jsonString) [10:29:59] <amr> yeah, i was just playing with using Json as a general purpose object mapper so i can pass around pojos [10:30:25] <amr> as i thought itd have (de)serializers for jsonobjects [10:31:01] <amr> serialising works as id expect, but not deserialising [10:31:23] <amr> suppose i shouls really just make things properly typed instead of relying on jsonobject [11:46:30] <cescoffier> pmlopes: I've an issue with bower on windows. It looks it can't resolve the amd module (don't have much details). It's when you run the vertx-web client example [11:46:39] <cescoffier> any hint you can give me ? [11:47:35] <pmlopes> is that with the 3.0.0-1? or just the latest git? [11:54:49] <purplefox> cescoffier: clement, is the new launcher stuff currently active in vertx-core master? [11:57:39] <cescoffier> purplefox: yes, except the redeploy [11:57:43] <cescoffier> I'm going to open the PR today [11:58:28] <purplefox> cescoffier: i have an possible issue with -ha [11:58:48] <purplefox> cescoffier: it seems that if i specify -ha at the command line using a fatjar the verticle doesn't get deployed [11:59:09] <cescoffier> run -ha ? or just -ha ? [12:01:00] <cescoffier> but it might be a regression [12:01:15] <cescoffier> java -jar my-fat-jar -ha should launch the jar in ha mode right ? [12:01:50] <cescoffier> (and deploy it) [12:02:47] <purplefox> ah forget it.. .the user is using an old vert.x version :( [12:02:52] <purplefox> sorry for the noise [12:03:02] <cescoffier> no problem [12:03:52] <cescoffier> I ran all the previous test with the launcher to detect regression, it's not exhaustive, so we may have some. [12:04:11] <cescoffier> BTW, I've ran all test (except vertx-web) on windows this morning [12:04:16] <cescoffier> everything fine (on 3.1) [13:31:57] * ChanServ sets mode: +o temporalfox

[14:28:26] <amr> how unique does a message codec's systemCodecID need to be?

[14:31:49] <amr> i have a generic-y message codec that i add per class i use for messages (~5/6)

[14:32:04] <amr> but it's one implementation… so defining the systemCodecId isnt terribly easy

[14:34:16] <amr> oh, set it to -1, interesting

[14:34:55] <amr> i need to rtfsc

[15:43:41] <Sticky> is there for a given message a way to turn off the no handlers exception?

[16:16:41] <purplefox> cescoffier: pmlopes: temporalfox: would anyone like to look at a potential clustering bug? I think this would be good practice for someone to get up to speed with core / clustering :)

[16:17:04] <temporalfox> @purplefox I can spend time on this

[16:17:16] <purplefox> cool

[16:17:47] <purplefox> temporalfox: here's the issue:

[16:18:05] <purplefox> it's a race condition and only occurs if the kill to both nodes happens concurrently

[16:18:11] <purplefox> it could be a bug in hazelcast

[16:18:14] <temporalfox> ok

[16:18:17] <temporalfox> sounds fun

[16:18:25] <purplefox> i had a quick look, but i'm not 100% sure

[16:18:33] <purplefox> yes a lot of fun ;)

[16:18:41] <temporalfox> how do you investigate this ?

[16:18:45] <temporalfox> with hazelcast logging ?

[16:18:47] <temporalfox> wireshark ?

[16:19:02] <temporalfox> system.out.println ?

[16:19:06] <temporalfox> a bit of everything :-) ?

[16:19:27] <purplefox> first i would reproduce the issue then add logging in the vert.x code (vertx-core and vertx-hazelcast) to see what is going on

[16:19:35] <temporalfox> ok

[16:19:45] <temporalfox> I'll let you know my progress

[16:19:57] <purplefox> thanks. if you need any help ping me

[16:20:26] <temporalfox> sure

[20:57:53] <pulse00> hi all. can anyone recommend any examplex for vertx-web form validation and binding?

[20:58:38] <Sticky> not sure if any of the examples do validation

[20:59:33] <pulse00> are complex forms a thing vertx-web would be a good candidate for? or do you think something like play or grails is better suited for that in the jvm ?

[21:03:22] <Sticky> so it really depends on what you are out for I think, from my breif play with grails, like most of those style tools you get a lot out of the box very quick, but as soon as you want to do something a bit uniq/outside their idomatic way it gets painful fast

[21:04:32] <Sticky> vertx by comparison does not really provide you THAT much out of the box, but does not really dictate how to write/structure your app so much

[21:08:34] <pulse00> yeah, i have the same view on that. so i'm basically looking for something less opinionated (it seems vertx is designed that way). the only thing i really think should be handled by he web-layer is form-binding and validation, where i'd rather not reinvent the weel.

[21:08:53] <Sticky> also since with vertx there is less magic going on behind the scenes, some problems I have with those frameworks is that since they hide much of the detail of how the app is working from you, diagnosing issues when things go wrong becomes a nightmare

[21:10:04] <Sticky> so form binding is easy enough, since your form should make a post request, so you will get a JsonObject server side with your data

[21:10:19] <Sticky> however validation afaik, is up to you

[21:10:43] <Sticky> having said that I havent used vertx-web that much so there could be something in there

[21:11:20] <pulse00> i've stumbled upon this here which seems to have some abstractions for forms

[21:11:57] <Sticky> oh yeah that, is that vertx 3?

[21:12:40] <pulse00> meh, doesn't look like