inline ;)
2015-01-28 11:46 GMT+01:00 Tresch, Anatole <[email protected]>: > Well, for me it is questionable if we need this: > > 1) I don’t see much advantages adding another abstraction for that > 2) we HAVE a well defined order currently based on prio and class name, so > there are no conflicts! > class name (worse when using fqn vs simple name) is not something you can bet on, too fragile + you can get multiple JsonPropertySource with the same ordinal and same values for instance. You'd need to use idendityhashCode to be deterministic then. > BTW throwing exception in a EE environment can have disastrous consequences, > so it is not always a good idea to just throw an exception...especially since > it may result on some assembly htat might be out of control of a developer or > operator. So I would suggest writing w warning is the better way to handle it. > In EE I don't expect to use it "like it" but in a CDI extension at minimum so not a big deal, will hopefully make the deployment fail. > Cheers, > Anatole > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Mittwoch, 28. Januar 2015 10:23 > To: [email protected]; Mark Struberg > Subject: Re: Multiple PropertySources with the same ordinal > > Why don't we just introduce a sorter API? Then ordinal would be @Order > and used as default only. This would allow us to fail when there is a > conflict since it is solvable on user side and shouldn't happen > anyway. > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau > http://www.tomitribe.com > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > 2015-01-28 10:08 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: >>> Did you read the Javadocs? It is clearly written that we sort >>> 1) by ordinal >>> 2) by fully qualified class name. >> >> Side note as I'm atm busy with a $$dayjob issue. We might additionally need >> to sort via the PropertySource name. That would be important if you have 2 >> PropertyFilePropertySource instances with different URLs. They should get a >> well defined sorting as well. >> >> >> After that there really should be no == in the sorting anymore, right? >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Tuesday, 27 January 2015, 21:26, Anatole Tresch <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > -1 for failing. >>> >>> Did you read the Javadocs? It is clearly written that we sort >>> 1) by ordinal >>> 2) by fully qualified class name. >>> >>> So there is an order that even is not dependend on classloaders. >>> >>> >>> >>> 2015-01-27 19:52 GMT+01:00 Oliver B. Fischer <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I am just writing some unit tests. One of them adds multiple property >>>> sources with the same key and the same ordinal. As we can not decide >>>> which one is the right one we should throw an exception. >>>> >>>> WDYT? >>>> >>>> Oliver >>>> >>>> -- >>>> N Oliver B. Fischer >>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany >>>> P +49 30 44793251 >>>> M +49 178 7903538 >>>> E [email protected] >>>> S oliver.b.fischer >>>> J [email protected] >>>> X http://xing.to/obf >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *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* >>>
