Hi Romain
2015-01-20 17:02 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>:
>
>
> performance overhead at runtime = 0...you shouldn't do it at runtime
> but at registration time.
-> Base on what information?
> > Also when we would add a method returning the expected formats (which I
> > think would be a very useful thing) we would loose the functional
> aspects,
> > if we add the
> This is why making the type the contract makes sense here.
>
> -> Dont get the point.
>
> > I see the following options currently:
> > 1) Define an annotation, e.g. @ConverterSpec to add to the meta-info
> > automatically for the auto-registered PropertyProvider instances.
> > 2) Add an additional interface, extending PropertyProvider that adds the
> > additional methods. This interface then must be used for registration and
> > adds the missing functionality.
> > 3) We could let be PropertyProvider to be non functional, but add in
> Java 8
> > an additional method to Configuration, which tykes a Function<String,T>.
> >
>
> In all cases you break java 8 lambdas, not an issue by itself but we
> should maybe think removing this java 8 module which will soon be only
> justified by Optional which is highly controversed.
>
This is simply not true at all:
- 1 Will not break it at all and will be Java 7 compatible.
- 2 Will also not break it, since the extended interface is only used for
regitration not for the Configuration interface, where
you can pass a Lambda starting with Java 8.
- 3 Would not break Lambdas, because in Java 7 PropertyProvider is not
functional because there is no such concept, and in Java 8 you have the
additional method, which takes a Lamba.
>
> > -Anatole
> >
> >
> > 2015-01-20 16:33 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>:
> >
> >> The annotation by itself doesn't make of the interface a
> >> FunctionalInterface or the opposite (ie you can be without it) - so
> >> yes this is fully useless from a code/bytecode point of view. That's
> >> because getTargetType() was added.
> >>
> >> I'd just remove it and use reflection to determine it. We would then
> >> be able to do a lot more than simple Class which are more and more
> >> java 1.4 (it is very funny to see it aside java 8 code ;))
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> @rmannibucau
> >> http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
> >> https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2015-01-20 16:18 GMT+01:00 Werner Keil <[email protected]>:
> >> > How, did it lose the annotation or was the method signature changed
> >> > violating the Functional Interface definition?
> >> >
> >> > Werner
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Reinhard Sandtner <
> >> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hey guys
> >> >>
> >> >> build is broken since PropertyConverter is no longer a
> >> FunctionalInterface
> >> >> :-(
> >> >>
> >> >> shall i fix it or is someone working on it?
> >> >>
> >> >> lg
> >> >> reini
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *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*
>
--
*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*
