Thoughts:

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> 
> 
> Hi Matt, hi all,
> 
> > This is similar to what I am doing with Morph
> > --in my day job I have written a fixed length file
> > library and am in the final stages of using Morph
> > to effect dumping an Object graph onto a "record"
> > structure. There still remains hope that this
> > library might see the light of day as an
> > OSS project, FWIW...
> 
> Morph is going much further and would need probably
> an individual
> architecture, than the tiny CSV-Project. How is your
> String-Object Mapping?
> Please give a link to your javadoc and source. Is
> this here the right place
> to discuss a general String-Object Mapper?

First, Morph is at http://morph.sourceforge.net . 
Second, it is currently under heavy development so the
version under development has many small improvements
beyond the current release.  The javadoc available on
the site should at least give you an idea.

The approach I took in my fixed length data library
was to write a library with a basic Java API for
building up generic concepts that can be treated as
records, files, etc.  Then I added Morph
interoperability in a subpackage--it's an optional
feature, and it might just as easily be accompanied by
some other strategy in yet another package.  I would
imagine this is the type of design Henri is
advocating.

Incidentally this fixed length library could probably
be extended to handle arbitrary field sizes and
already supports a configurable delimiter between
fields so it is not far from being usable as a CSV
library itself.  Of course, removing the fixed length
limitation would mean I'd have to come up with a new
concept in which to think of my (fixed length)
library.  :)

-Matt

> 
> > In BeanUtils I have found the ClassConverter,
> > with my fist look I can't see the useness.
> 
> Sorry, I was blind. This converts a String into a
> Class.
> 
> > Is this the right class?
> 
> No it is not a String-Object Mapper. Has anyone a
> hint for the right class
> in BeanUtils?
> 
> Bye Sebastian
> 
> P.S. Would it not be better avoiding a full quote?
> Direct quotes are more
> readable and in the full quote is the email address.
> Not everyone would
> like to see his email adress in the list.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to