XRead(Group) Params with allowing block=0

[sazzad16]

Resolves #2277

[dengliming]

Personally, I think we can do this logic by simply determining whether the block is greater than 0 or not, and in general I usually think that if a block is equal to 0 or less than 0, you don't need a block, and we can explain that in comment. Using XReadParams is good too. can avoid having too many arguments for this method. and we can also comment or deprecated void xread(int count, long block, Entry<String, StreamEntryID>... streams); since the block param is not working. Thanks. : )

[sazzad16]

@dengliming

we can also comment or deprecated void xread(int count, long block, Entry<String, StreamEntryID>... streams); since the block param is not working

Nice suggestion, thanks

[dengliming]

@sazzad16 Can you resolve the conflicts so that we can take this pr here? : )

[dengliming]

LGTM

[gkorland]

@sazzad16 I would have consider a different name for xReadGroupParams() perhaps create()

[dengliming]

Seems that static method is not really necessary. Because user can also new Object by none args Constructor. Maybe we can also keep none args Constructor private?

[sazzad16]

@gkorland It is there for method chaining. Any good enough name is okay to me.

@dengliming Empty constructor is still an option to the users if they want to use. I don't to hide it until it is hurting the development process.

[sazzad16]

@gkorland We are carrying this pattern probably since Jedis 2.10.0. Each of the Params classes have a static method with name at this pattern. Some of already merged PR's for 3.6.0 include this pattern. If we want replace this pattern with something like create(), we'll always have time to do that. IMHO, we shouldn't keep this PR on hold just for this matter if we agree on the implementation of this PR.

[gkorland]

Each of the Params classes have a static method with name at this pattern.

If that is the common pattern then lest leave it like that