Alright, so it would make sense to use a different category name for the
type converters?


On 3 June 2014 11:43, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote:

> Use for what? Most main components that are part of the main configuration
> use core. The key to the category is what will be processing the plugin.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 3, 2014, at 9:12 AM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> It's probably a simple change. In the meantime, should I use the Core
> category, or should I use a new one?
>
>
> On 3 June 2014 08:51, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> This sounds like an optimization, not something that requires spending a
>> lot of time on.
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Jun 3, 2014, at 12:15 AM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Exactly, an enum would help know what is legal. It could just be used for
>> documentation for all I know. A set of constants would be better if we need
>> something extensible.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: Matt Sicker
>> Date:06/03/2014 02:48 (GMT-05:00)
>> To: Log4J Developers List
>> Subject: Re: Registering converters
>>
>> Well, what categories are we supposed to use? Is there a set list, or can
>> we just use whatever? It's not that clear other than looking at current
>> usage (most things are in the Core category).
>>
>>
>> On 3 June 2014 01:31, Ralph Goers <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> A new annotation to do what? To specify which category the plugin
>>> belongs to? What is wrong with the way it is now? What problem are we
>>> trying to solve?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On Jun 2, 2014, at 8:30 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> A new annotation seems simpler to me but that might be contradictory to
>>> what Ralph had in mind when he created the framework. Hopefully, let us
>>> know ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 11:23 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, but now I'm wondering which approach to take. Re-use @Plugin, add
>>>> another annotation, or refactor how categories are handled in @Plugin.
>>>> Could be a mix of 1 and 3, with 3 coming later.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2 June 2014 22:00, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Welcome back Matt then.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you putting yourself on deck to redo the type converters a la
>>>>> Log4j?
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:55 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Scratch that idea. It's using ASM. That's definitely not worth it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2 June 2014 21:51, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm looking at how Spring does it, and for pre-1.8 code, it's quite
>>>>>>> the rabbit hole. I'll report back when I find my way out.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2 June 2014 21:39, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:35 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not for the factory/builder stuff! Unless we cached more data
>>>>>>>>> about plugins like that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ah, I made an incorrect assumption then. Let's keep it simple and
>>>>>>>> require the name then? We can always enhance later.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2 June 2014 21:32, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It would only happen at compile time... so who cares?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In regards to the parameter reflection stuff, I can't find
>>>>>>>>>>> anything in 1.6 other than using
>>>>>>>>>>> Introspector.getBeanInfo(Class<?>).getMethodDescriptors() and
>>>>>>>>>>> MethodDescriptor.getParameterDescriptors(). From what I recall,
>>>>>>>>>>> Introspector is rather slow for this sort of situation and is 
>>>>>>>>>>> mostly used
>>>>>>>>>>> in GUIs that deal with JavaBeans.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2 June 2014 21:20, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2 June 2014 21:14, Gary Gregory <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, my point is that you'd just use an annotation. What the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> annotation is, I do not know. I'm not crazy about the category 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> general because I am one typo away on a late night from getting 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> stuck. If
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the code does not compile, that's easier to fix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree on that. It's terribly frustrating to deal with runtime
>>>>>>>>>>>> problems that should have been detectable at compile time. Perhaps 
>>>>>>>>>>>> instead
>>>>>>>>>>>> of categories we had a meta-annotation that describes a plugin 
>>>>>>>>>>>> category,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and then plugins can use a category annotation instead of the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> parameter? We
>>>>>>>>>>>> could really use annotations like this to make things more typed 
>>>>>>>>>>>> with less
>>>>>>>>>>>> typing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
>>>>>>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
>>>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>
>


-- 
Matt Sicker <[email protected]>

Reply via email to