On 08/15/2013 03:57 PM, Ray Tsang wrote:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Galder Zamarreño <gal...@redhat.com
<mailto:gal...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Aug 14, 2013, at 11:14 PM, Ray Tsang <saturn...@gmail.com
<mailto:saturn...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> I actually did not enjoy writing parsers and config builders etc...
i felt that writing the parsers are error prone - there are many
places to touch when adding a property - maybe I just didn't follow
the best example...
i'm just thinking out loud but perhaps there is a way to consolidate
the configuration builder, configuration, configuration parser, and
xsd with a single set of metadata - after all, I think they are all
trying to set the same set of properties.
Well, it's true that the Maven build process could generate at least the
XSD automatically, and automatic parsing is not that complicated - in
fact I've done this in RadarGun, changing Mircea's original setter-way.
But in order to be able to use the programmatic configuration, you have
either write the builder yourself or generate it with some tool (I don't
think it would be right to generate further Java sources during the
Maven build, even if it is possible). And using tool for generation of
some Java code based on another code seems to me as another nasty
complication.
Alltogether, writing *Configuration and *ConfigurationBuilder should be
enough, all the rest can be managed by runtime/build.
^ Why not? Too verbose? Too many classes?
I'd rather improve this than carry on supporting property-based
configuration (any other type safety advocates?)
+1, the fact that I had to test both was a nuance...
+1 as well
Radim
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
