http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1601805/diff/11002/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/autobean/shared/ValueCodex.java
File user/src/com/google/web/bindery/autobean/shared/ValueCodex.java
(right):

http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1601805/diff/11002/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/autobean/shared/ValueCodex.java#newcode41
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/autobean/shared/ValueCodex.java:41: if
(value.isNumber()) {
Although strictly speaking this is an improvement, I think users will be
confused by a partial implementation. If we support converting JSON
numbers to BigDecimals at all, as a naive user I'd expect to be able to
handle BigDecimal's entire range, and not be limited to a JavaScript
number's range due to an internal limitation. (If a smaller range is
okay, I wouldn't be using a BigDecimal in the first place.)

It seems like we should be able to do better than this by accessing the
underlying string without converting it to a number first, so we can
handle BigDecimal's entire range instead of just the JavaScript range
for a number?

But I tried drilling down and I'm not following how JSON parsing works.
It looks like a project for a different CL.

Maybe best to revert this and start another CL if you want to work on
BigDecimal/BigInteger.

http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1601805/

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

Reply via email to