You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tamaya.apache.org by "Oliver B. Fischer" <o....@swe-blog.net> on 2015/11/03 19:08:48 UTC
Re: Passing additionally the accessed key to PropertyConverter.convert
As it would be an extension module I am fine with it. But I would realy
propose to put the meta data of a key below the value holding key
itself. IMHO there should be a simple and obvious tree structure. It
improves the readability.
Could we agree on that?
Am 31.10.15 um 01:38 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> Well for collection, map and object it is useless since it is part of the
> java side not the config IMO. That said it does make the context useless.
> Le 30 oct. 2015 14:52, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> Hi Oliver
>>
>> basically I would even not call append it. they are additional keys with
>> allow to add additional information. Similar mechanisms could also be used
>> for tracking the origin of the entries read. The format/syntax is not yet
>> fixed (and also not implemented). I started in the experimental collections
>> modul just with a small example configuration. I am happy to share thaughts
>> on this.
>> 1) I decided to use the {} for having a separation of meta entries, from
>> other ones. Basically I could even filter out the meta-entries for normal
>> access. So adding meta basically is possible, but I think we should try to
>> be a bit more advanced to prevent clashes with anything users define. E.g.
>> how about:
>>
>> a.b.mylist.__meta.collection-type=java.util.LinkedList
>> a.b.mylist.__meta.element-type=int
>> a.b.mylist.__meta.collection-separators=,;
>>
>> or even shorter:
>>
>> a.b.mylist.__collection-type=java.util.LinkedList
>> a.b.mylist.__element-type=int
>> a.b.mylist.__collection-separators=,;
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Anatole
>>
>>
>> 2015-10-30 15:10 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
>>
>> the
>> kind
>> data
>> be
>> also
>> be
>> just
>> having
>> people
>> very
>>
>> --
>> *Anatole Tresch*
>> Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>> Glärnischweg 10
>> CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>>
>> *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>> *Twitter: @atsticks*
>> *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>> <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>>
>> *Google: atsticksMobile +41-76 344 62 79*
>>
--
N Oliver B. Fischer
A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
P +49 30 44793251
M +49 178 7903538
E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
S oliver.b.fischer
J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
X http://xing.to/obf
Re: Passing additionally the accessed key to PropertyConverter.convert
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
I'm -1 to assume the structure in Tamaya at API level (= dont force
anything). In all extensions I'm +1 (= encourage it).
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Tomitriber
<http://www.tomitribe.com>
2015-11-03 10:08 GMT-08:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
> As it would be an extension module I am fine with it. But I would realy
> propose to put the meta data of a key below the value holding key itself.
> IMHO there should be a simple and obvious tree structure. It improves the
> readability.
>
> Could we agree on that?
>
> Am 31.10.15 um 01:38 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>
>> Well for collection, map and object it is useless since it is part of the
>> java side not the config IMO. That said it does make the context useless.
>> Le 30 oct. 2015 14:52, "Anatole Tresch" <at...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>> Hi Oliver
>>>
>>> basically I would even not call append it. they are additional keys with
>>> allow to add additional information. Similar mechanisms could also be
>>> used
>>> for tracking the origin of the entries read. The format/syntax is not yet
>>> fixed (and also not implemented). I started in the experimental
>>> collections
>>> modul just with a small example configuration. I am happy to share
>>> thaughts
>>> on this.
>>> 1) I decided to use the {} for having a separation of meta entries, from
>>> other ones. Basically I could even filter out the meta-entries for normal
>>> access. So adding meta basically is possible, but I think we should try
>>> to
>>> be a bit more advanced to prevent clashes with anything users define.
>>> E.g.
>>> how about:
>>>
>>> a.b.mylist.__meta.collection-type=java.util.LinkedList
>>> a.b.mylist.__meta.element-type=int
>>> a.b.mylist.__meta.collection-separators=,;
>>>
>>> or even shorter:
>>>
>>> a.b.mylist.__collection-type=java.util.LinkedList
>>> a.b.mylist.__element-type=int
>>> a.b.mylist.__collection-separators=,;
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Anatole
>>>
>>>
>>> 2015-10-30 15:10 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <o....@swe-blog.net>:
>>>
>>> the
>>> kind
>>> data
>>> be
>>> also
>>> be
>>> just
>>> having
>>> people
>>> very
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Anatole Tresch*
>>> Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
>>> Glärnischweg 10
>>> CH - 8620 Wetzikon
>>>
>>> *Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
>>> *Twitter: @atsticks*
>>> *Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
>>> <http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*
>>>
>>> *Google: atsticksMobile +41-76 344 62 79*
>>>
>>>
> --
> N Oliver B. Fischer
> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> P +49 30 44793251
> M +49 178 7903538
> E o.b.fischer@swe-blog.net
> S oliver.b.fischer
> J oliver.b.fischer@jabber.org
> X http://xing.to/obf
>
>