Re: [picocontainer-dev] ConfigParameterTestCase / ConfigParameter

Hi Paul,

Paul Hammant wrote:

> Well I have the following ....

[snip]

so we would have instead:

private static final Map<Class, ParameterFactory>
  stringConverters = new HashMap<Class, ParameterFactory>();
static {
    stringConverters.put(Integer.class, 
        new ValueOfParameterFactory<Integer>();
    stringConverters.put(Double.class, 
        new ValueOfParameterFactory<Double>();
    stringConverters.put(Boolean.class, 
        new ValueOfParameterFactory<Boolean>();
    stringConverters.put(Long.class, 
        new ValueOfParameterFactory<Long>();
    stringConverters.put(File.class, 
        new StringConstructorParameterFactory<File>();
    ...
}

We might find better names for the classes though. We may collect them in an
own package.

> ... inside BasicComponentParameter.  Its not so generified, but we
> don't need the provides() method as the key to the map, is the clue
> to whether it can do it or not. Its a shame that each of those inner 
> classes is 800 bytes or so.

Well, here we have no inner classes anymore.

> I think for now, a fixed list of conversions is fine - going up to
> the set that XStream caters for.

You can only use the SingleValueConverters anyway and with the generified
versions from my last posting, you can handle quite a lot.
 
> Later on we could have DPC.addTypeConverter(..) at an instance level.
> 
> Thoughts?

- Jörg



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email