Hi Oliver,
Interesting question, did you look into this any further ? If I had to
say something about it, I guess I would prefer a generic solution.
However, at the moment this seems to me to be a somewhat theoretical
exercise.
I added code for our apps that check whether variable substitution is
possible for all properties, see below. The idea is to simply replace
a StrLookup with a proxy to the existing one and throwing exceptions
when no variable substitution was possible. Note that we're still
using 1.4 (btw: congrats on 1.5) and also note that it has not been
tested very much.
It might be an idea to change setThrowExceptionOnMissing() - using
similar code as below - such that exceptions are also thrown when
variables cannot be substituted. However, this would change the
behaviour of a number of methods, like
AbstractConfiguration::interpolatedConfiguration() which will possibly
start throwing exceptions after implementation of this change.
What do you think ?
Regards,
Michiel
public static List checkVariableSubstitution( final
AbstractConfiguration abstractConfiguration) {
final ConfigurationInterpolator configurationInterpolator =
abstractConfiguration.getInterpolator();
final StrLookup originalStrLookup =
configurationInterpolator.getDefaultLookup();
final StrLookup strLookup = new StrLookup() {
public String lookup(String arg0) {
final String result = originalStrLookup.lookup( arg0);
if( result == null) {
throw new ConfigurationRuntimeException( arg0);
}
return result;
}
};
configurationInterpolator.setDefaultLookup( strLookup);
final List list = new ArrayList();
final Iterator iterator = abstractConfiguration.getKeys();
while( iterator.hasNext()) {
final String key = (String) iterator.next();
try {
abstractConfiguration.getString( key);
} catch ( final ConfigurationRuntimeException
configurationRuntimeException) {
list.add( "Variable " +
configurationRuntimeException.getLocalizedMessage() + " mentioned in
property "
+ key + " could not be resolved");
}
}
configurationInterpolator.setDefaultLookup( originalStrLookup);
return list;
}
On 8/29/07, Oliver Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Michiel,
>
> Michiel Kalkman wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Is there any code in configuration which performs sanity checks on a
> > configuration ? I'm looking for code that checks:
> > - whether there are unresolved values (i.e. values with ${...} in them)
> > - whether there are multiple keys with the same value
> >
> > after loading the configuration.
> >
> > I guess I could make these checks myself, but I think more people
> > could be interested.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Michiel
> >
>
> there is no support for such features so far, but I think this is an
> interesting idea.
>
> What would be the best way of providing such checks: as additional
> methods of the ConfigurationUtils class or as a new dedicated checker class?
>
> Patches would be welcome in this area!
>
> Oliver
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
