The fun thing about this is that using builders, default values don't need to be specified as annotations. I'm starting to lean toward that idea more.
On 26 May 2014 18:46, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > How would that prevent people from writing nonsensical declarations? It > seems confusing to have one annotation with a bunch of attributes, one for > each type. It feels likesome hackto me. Having specific annotations seems > foolproof. > > Gary > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Matt Sicker > Date:05/26/2014 15:19 (GMT-05:00) > To: Log4J Developers List > Subject: Re: PluginAttribute vs. IntPluginAttribute > > We can choose which attribute of the annotation to use based on the type > the annotation is attached to. That wouldn't be too hard. > > > On 26 May 2014 08:34, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> A recent commit contains: >>>> >>>> >>>>> + @PluginAttribute(value = "blocking", defaultValue = >>>>> "true") final boolean blocking, >>>>> >>>> >>>> Using a String default for a non-string attribute seems like a punch in >>>> the eye ;-) This really feels unnatural. >>>> >>>> Currently, I cannot say: >>>> >>>> @PluginAttribute(value = "blocking", defaultValue = true) final boolean >>>> blocking, >>>> @PluginAttribute(value = "someInt", defaultValue = 123) final int >>>> blocking, >>>> >>>> That would require the annotation attribute's defaultValue to be typed >>>> as an Object which is illegal. >>>> >>> >>> Would it be an idea to have different attributes for the default value, >>> one for each type? >>> @PluginAttribute(value = "blocking", defaultBooleanValue = true) final >>> boolean blocking, >>> @PluginAttribute(value = "someInt", defaultIntValue = 123) final int >>> blocking, >>> >>> >> >> I do not think so. What would this mean: >> >> @PluginAttribute(value = "foo", defaultIntValue = 123, >> defaultBooleanValue = true) final int blocking, >> >> ? >> >> Gary >> >> >>>> I suggest: >>>> >>>> @BooleanPluginAttribute(value = "someBool", defaultValue = true) final >>>> boolean blocking >>>> @IntPluginAttribute(value = "someInt", defaultValue = 123) final int >>>> blocking >>>> >>>> If not, then at least say: >>>> >>>> @PluginAttribute(value = "blocking", defaultValue = TRUE) >>>> >>>> and do a static import of TRUE from our Strings class (assuming you'd >>>> add TRUE to Strings). >>>> >>>> If we are going to do typed configuration with a custom annotation >>>> mechanism it seems inevitable to have to go with IntPluginAttribute, and so >>>> on. Using mixed types looks very odd. >>>> >>>> Gary >>>> >>>> -- >>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org >>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second >>>> Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second >> Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
