Gabriel Roldan ha scritto:
> Hi Andrea,
> 
> the converter function is a really good idea, and just what I was 
> thinking about when reading over the problem. One thing though, is that 
> the way it is exposed seems like too java centric, perhaps it would be 
> nice to create a function per primitive type (say, asInt(), asDouble(), 
> etc), and avoid the java class names as argument? It is just because 
> having a function tied to the underlying programming language in the 
> interoperability protocol seems a bit odd.

I would not be too concerned about the "interoperability" part, OGC
gave filter functions a syntax level interoperability, but since
they did not specify a list of well known ones, the interoperability
potential ends there.

My suggestion of being able to specify int/double/long/... (primitives)
was actually a way to make the converting function more amenable to the
normal user. Having functions like asInt/asDouble is better from a user
point of view, but requires writing a number of functions, and does not
leave out the need for a generic convert function, since the specific
ones cannot cover every case.

But instead of making a converter that does handle java.lang and
primitive names to turn them into classes, I can as well roll a handful
of functions that actually use the generic one as their superclass,
and roll:
asInteger
asLong
asFloat
asDouble
asBoolean
asString

Opinions?

Cheers
Andrea

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and 
around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save
$200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco.
300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. 
Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to