Hi Chris,
this is certainly interesting stuff. Now that Commons Configuration
requires Java 1.5 at minimum, we are able to define an API which makes
use of enum constants.
Especially the aspect of annotation meta data seems promising IMHO.
There are surely many good use cases.
What I am not sure about is how to actually integrate this new feature
with the existing API. I think we should not enforce the use of enums in
general. Some applications may require generating keys dynamically;
also, HierarchicalConfiguration supports complex keys allowing the
selection of specific elements in hierarchical structures.
So should there be overloaded methods for both plain String keys and
enum keys? This would bloat the API. Would there be two different
Configuration interfaces?
Oliver
Am 21.03.2012 18:44, schrieb Christof May:
Hi all,
I'm not sure if this issue has been discussed before (couldn't find
anything on the mail list thou...), but what do you guys think of using
type-safe enum constants as keys instead of plain String values?
I assume there is a general understanding here that using enum constants
instead of strings is the "right thing" to do, but obviously there are
also important reasons not do so (legacy code, interface changes,
pre-Java1.5 stuff etc...). But I guess the most important one is that
Java enums never have been designed to work in a generic form (namely:
no abstract enums and/or enum inheritance). So there is no way to put an
enum placeholder in a library, and provide the concrete enum values in
the implementing application. An issue which I and other people already
have bemoaned (see
http://java.dzone.com/articles/java-should-have-extended for example),
but it is nevertheless a given fact we have to live with in the
foreseeable future... :(
Having said that, I just see two ways of using enum constants for
fetching config values. For one just using a lame
config.getWhatever(MyEnum.key.name()) everywhere. It would be a start,
but well.. not really what I was searching for...
The other solution I see would be to mark the enums with a marker
interface, and take that as the key placeholder, such as:
public interface Configurable {
public String name();
}
public interface Configuration {
boolean getBoolean(Configurable key);
(other methods follow here...)
}
In the application you would define the keys in an enum such as that:
public enum MyKeys implements Configurable {
FOO,
BAR,
...;
}
Then you could access the config values in real type-safe way:
boolean myValue = config.getBoolean(MyKeys.BAR);
Another advantage would be that enum constants can be easily enriched
with meta-data (via a custom annotation), for example:
public enum MyKeys implements Configurable {
@ConfigData(
defaultValue="foo",
type=String.class,
mandatory=true,
pattern="[a-z]{1,4}",
reload=false)
FOO,
...;
}
The possibilities here are endless (see also my pet project at
www.soplets.org exploring more in-depth the meta-data aspects of
annotations), but for a beginning having just enum constants alone would
be a good start in my view...
What do you think about that proposal, does that make any sense? Any
other options I have overlooked so far? Looking forward hearing your
opinions...
regards,
Chris May
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
