simonbence commented on a change in pull request #4123: NIFI-7188: Adding filter capabilities into search & prerequisite refactors URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/4123#discussion_r390934339
########## File path: nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-framework-bundle/nifi-framework/nifi-web/nifi-web-api/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/web/search/attributematchers/BasicAttributeMatcher.java ########## @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more + * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with + * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership. + * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 + * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with + * the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software + * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and + * limitations under the License. + */ +package org.apache.nifi.web.search.attributematchers; + +import org.apache.nifi.connectable.Connectable; +import org.apache.nifi.web.search.query.SearchQuery; + +import java.util.List; + +import static org.apache.nifi.web.search.attributematchers.AttributeMatcher.addIfMatching; + +public class BasicAttributeMatcher<T extends Connectable> implements AttributeMatcher<T> { Review comment: I completely agree and I hesitated a lot. The reason I went this way is the following: I wanted to reduce code duplication around search where it is reasonable and originally I was hoping for one class with this behaviour. But as the `getName` and `getIdentifier` methods in the different components are not inherited from the same parent it ended with multiple classes with almost the same behaviour. It looked a good idea to not add one more, but on second though... It might also makes sense to follow an approach similar to the `AttributeBasedComponentMatcher`. It comes with a somewhat more complex instantiation but is more flexible. What is your opinion? ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] With regards, Apache Git Services
