Scala does support annotations, they're just anemic at this point. I hadn't tried, but does extending ClassfileAnnotation allow runtime visibility? That would give you a pure scala implementation. If not, I think we need to rally for StaticAnnotation/ClassfileAnnotation to be joined by their future brother RuntimeAnnotation.
- Josh On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 6:31 PM, marius d. <marius.dan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sep 13, 3:15 pm, Joni Freeman <freeman.j...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > That annotation is used to configure the json path when extracting > > values. By default the extraction code assumes that case class > > parameter names match with json field names. For instance these match: > > > > case class Foo(bar: String, baz: Int) > > { "bar": "qwerty", "baz": 10 } > > > > But sometimes json field names can contain characters which are not > > allowed in Scala identifiers. For example: > > { "foo-bar": "qwerty", "baz": 10 } > > > > Now, to able to extract this we have to somehow tell the extractor the > > exact path explicitly. Currently @path annotation is used for that: > > case class Foo(@path("foo-bar") bar: String, baz: Int) > > > > I don't see how a trait can accomplish this, maybe I'm missing > > something? > > > > The reason why it is in Java is that Scala annotations are not > > accessible at runtime. > > Right but I'd also suggest removing Java code from Lift stack. The > above can be easily achieved by introducing a trait such as: > > case class Foo(bar: String with Nominator, baz: Int) > > Lift is a 100% Scala code with zero Java code. We also have strong > opinions in the team that we should stay away from annotations. > > one option would be something like this: > > Lift would have : > > trait Nominator{ > def name : String > } > > In user's code: > > case class Foo(bar: String with MyNominator, baz: Int) > > trait MyNominator extends Nominator { > def name = "foo-bar" > } > > Yes it is more verbose then the annotation but IMHO it is more Scala- > ish & Lift-ish. > > > > > > > Cheers Joni > > > > On Sep 13, 11:03 pm, Timothy Perrett <timo...@getintheloop.eu> wrote: > > > > > Just had a browse over the latest commit and found the following in > > > path.java: > > > > > @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME) > > > @Target(ElementType.TYPE) > > > public @interface path { > > > public String value(); > > > > > } > > > > > Any reason were not using a trait etc to complete the same > > > functionality? > > > > > Cheers, Tim > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---