Hi *,

Am 12.02.2018 um 03:11 schrieb William Lieurance:
> I'm looking at the supportedFormats added by the converters in core.  I note 
> a lot of inconsistency in the text with most converters adding types with <> 
> around them.  For instance the LongConverter adds "<long>" but the 
> ShortConverter adds "short".  The various date and duration converters add 
> examples with no <> in that same spot, and BigDecimal has a type and an arrow 
> and some other information "<bigDecimal> -> new BigDecimal(String)".   Is 
> there a consistent pattern I can throw into tests?  I looked around at the 
> documentation but while the list of supportedFormats is in there, there's not 
> much info about what these strings are supposed to mean to the reader 
> including the difference between a type in <> and one that is not.
> --William
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-tamaya/blob/master/code/core/src/main/java/org/apache/tamaya/core/internal/converters/LongConverter.java#L53
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-tamaya/blob/master/code/core/src/main/java/org/apache/tamaya/core/internal/converters/ShortConverter.java#L54
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-tamaya/blob/master/code/core/src/main/java/org/apache/tamaya/core/internal/converters/BigDecimalConverter.java#L51

browsing through the code at

I think we should harmonize the way we register new formats and decide
for one format across all implementations.

To "enforce" this format we could add it to the Javadoc.

Having a look at the way the format is added I'd recommend to replace

supportedFormats.add(format + " (" + converterType.getSimpleName() + ")");


supportedFormats.add(format + " (" + converterType.getSimpleName() +

which would make it easier to just remove the <...> among implementations.

Just my 2ct


Reply via email to