[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-1018?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12598225#action_12598225
]
Arnaud Simon commented on QPID-1018:
------------------------------------
As discussed during our weekly meeting it would be a better idea to access
properties through accessors. The following solutions could be adopted:
1) We use a class and provide getters for each property
2) We use an enum and provide (type, default-value, value, etc..)
I would suggest we go for the second solution as it's the most flexible one. So
we should have something like:
///-----
MAX_PREFETCH("boolean", true, Boolean.getBoolean("max_prefetch"));
Conf(String type, Object defaultVal, Object val)
{
_type = type;
_defaultVal = defaultVal;
_val = val;
}
public String getType()
{
return _type;
}
public Object getVal()
{
return _val;
}
.....
We can discuss what property descriptors we like to have, I would say the
minimum list is:
- name
- type
- description
- default value
- value
> Client properties centralization
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: QPID-1018
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-1018
> Project: Qpid
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Java Client
> Affects Versions: M3
> Reporter: Arnaud Simon
> Assignee: Arnaud Simon
> Fix For: M3
>
>
> Currently client props are distributed all over the code. It would be more
> coherent and easy to document if we centralized them.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
