On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 1:27 PM Kamil Breguła <kamil.breg...@polidea.com> wrote:
>
> We move the problem to a place where we have enough data to handle it.
> The user has information about whether he can indicate a better type
> based on many parameters e.g. dag_id or execution_date. I imagine that
> the user may want to convert the conf to type field depending on
> dag_id and choose the solution that best suits his situation.
>
> https://pastebin.com/UpUKYEvg
>
> It is the user who specified the input data (e.g. in Web UI), so the
> user can best choose how to process this data.
The example you pasted is what I would imagine how users will interact
with the API client as well.
I would like to point out that in statically typed language, a string
containing serialized json is not that much different from a generic
typed object. For example, in go, you can convert an interface{} to
any specific struct type you want based on dag_id or execution_date as
well. The only difference would be calling json parse function to
parse a string into a specific struct or doing runtime type cast using
runtime reflection. With generic typed objects, the compiler can at
least make sure a json serializable object is being passed to the
client. With string, it could be anything including invalid JOSN. This
also applies to other static typed languages I am familiar with like
C/C++ and Rust. Again, not a Java expert, so I can't comment on Java
side of things.
