Emily Gouge wrote: > > > Andrea Aime wrote: >> Justin Deoliveira ha scritto: >>> Hi Emily, >>> >>> Emily Gouge wrote: >>>> Thanks for the info Justin. (Sorry I'm slow getting back to you; I >>>> was away last week). >>>> >>>> If I work at implementing this can I bug you for help and ask you to >>>> review the work as I go along? I'm sure I'll need some advice on >>>> how to do things properly. >>> Yeah for sure. Basically the general idea is this. The first part is >>> easy, just add a public hint to the Converters class (or maybe >>> ConvterFactory): >>> >>> public static final Key SAFE_CONVERSION = new Key(Boolean.class); >>> >>> Then the next step is hunt down every implementation of the Converter >>> interface, and have it respect the SAFE_CONVERSION hint if it is set. >>> Off the top of my head this mostly applies to the NumericConverter, >>> and the TemporalConverter. >>> >>> One hitch i notice is that while ConverterFactory.createConverter() >>> takes a map of hints, Converter.convert() does not. So we probably >>> have to add a method to the Converter interface. >> >> Agreed > > Alternatively, the createConverter() function could make use of the hint > and create either a "safe" or "non-safe" version of the converter. > > It looks to me like the way to convert values is to use the > Converters.convert() method which can take hints. This method then > uses those hints to create the correct converter. So I was thinking we > let the createConverter() function use the hint and not add it to the > convert() function. Yup, that would be perfectly valid, and nicer in that no public api would have to change. It would mean we would have to separate out the NumericConverter calss into a safe and non-safe version. Which I would be ok with. > > >>>> Lastly - how do we define a "Safe Conversion"? Is this something we >>>> can define or is this well defined somewhere. I'm thinking that >>>> converting from integer to double is probably safe but not so for >>>> double to integer. I'm sure the other types have similar properties. >>> I guess any conversion that may result in any loss of information (a >>> lossy conversion) would be considered unsafe? Perhaps someone has a >>> more precise definition. >> >> Sounds good enough to me :) >> Cheers >> Andrea >> > > > Thanks All, > Emily
-- Justin Deoliveira OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Enterprise support for open source geospatial. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
