[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-598?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13962577#comment-13962577
]
Matt Sicker commented on LOG4J2-598:
------------------------------------
There's absolutely no question as to the awesome work Ralph has done so far!
These are things that look like TODO style items that would eventually be
addressed whenever someone had the itch.
I like the @Required attribute idea very much. Are there any other validation
annotations that may be useful to implement along with that? Also, what types
should that support? I don't think we need to go as overkill as bean validation
since we don't have such complex object graphs to validate, but a lightweight
version of such could be handy. We could even borrow code from commons
validation.
> Support more data types in plugin attributes
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LOG4J2-598
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-598
> Project: Log4j 2
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Core
> Affects Versions: 2.0-rc1
> Reporter: Matt Sicker
> Assignee: Matt Sicker
> Labels: annotations, plugins
>
> Currently, annotating plugin factory method parameters with
> {{@PluginAttribute}} only supports String types, but we use a lot of plugin
> attributes that could be automatically converted to primitive types. Now I'm
> not suggesting something as advanced as how Camel handles parameter injection
> (which does automatic non-trivial type conversion), but it would be great to
> support booleans, ints, longs, etc., to simplify quite a bit of extraneous
> string parsing.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
