Adrian Crum wrote: > --- On Sat, 2/13/10, Adam Heath <[email protected]> wrote: >> From: Adam Heath <[email protected]> >> Subject: Conversion framework is not 'most specific' compatible >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Saturday, February 13, 2010, 1:09 PM >> When Converters.getConverter doesn't >> find an exact match for a >> conversion request, it loops over all registered converts, >> and asks >> then if they can handle it. However, this looping is >> not in any >> particular order, as it is based on Map.values(), which is >> mostly random. >> >> This means if there was a Converter registered for Map, and >> another >> registered for LinkedHashMap, that if code tried to >> convert >> org.ofbiz.base.util.collection.LRUMap, it's unknown which >> Converter >> would be returned. I would say LinkedHashMap is more >> correct. >> >> Then, if there was a Map and MyNewInterface Converter >> register, and a >> conversion request comes in that implements both those >> interfaces, >> then which one should be returned? >> >> Java compilers(janino is one I am semi-familiar with it's >> internals), >> are designed to handle this. But the algorithm isn't >> the simplest. >> >> I suggest that if multiple Converters are found for a >> request, that an >> exception gets thrown, and a warning logged. > > Why not add code that finds the closest match (or most specific) in the case > of more than one match?
Because such code is complex. Let's say there are converters for Map, FooInterface, BarInterface, BazInterface, BarAndBazInterface, and AbstractMapAndFooInterface. Then, and object that extends AbstractMapAndFooInterface, and implements both BarInterface and BazInterface. Picking the correct converter is a little difficult in this case.
