We've had this discussion many times. The first task of a specification is to
specify to enable interoperability. That is, it is not about convenience. Once
you have the interoperability, anybody can create convenience functions; it is
then up to the users to standardize on a few libraries.
The reason is that
- One man's convenience is another man's bloat. An
- Specifying costs a lot of effort, a lot easier to do this stuff in an open
source project
Then I was wondering why I did not have this issue lately? I realized that I
always use DS and get a Map that I convert to an interface:
interface Props {
int port();
List<String> hosts();
}
void setFoo(Foo foo, Map<String,Object> props) {
Props props = Converter.cnv(Props.class,props);
...
}
The Converter I used is quite powerful, it really converts anything to anything
it could make sense. This converter is in bnd (aQute.libg). I even catch myself
converting e.g. List<String> to List<Long> because it beats looping. It makes
extensive use of the generic type information. So I rarely care what the actual
types are in the properties.
Kind regards,
Peter Kriens
On 7 feb. 2014, at 17:00, Raymond Auge <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I was wondering if there were provided utilities for handling the property
> types.
>
> For instance, string+, arrays of primitives, etc?
>
> I hate rewriting things if they already exist. However, I don't see anything
> either in the core or compendium, but it seems rather sad if we all have to
> reproduce such handler code.
>
> --
> Raymond Augé (@rotty3000)
> Senior Software Architect
> Liferay, Inc. (@Liferay)
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OSGi Developer Mail List
> [email protected]
> https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
_______________________________________________
OSGi Developer Mail List
[email protected]
https://mail.osgi.org/mailman/listinfo/osgi-dev
