johnzon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>
Subject Re: Inconsistent Mapping Behavior...
Date Wed, 02 Jan 2019 15:49:09 GMT
Yes, but I was kinda hoping to do it myself.  I’ve not been contributing as
much as I’d like.  Good work!

On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 4:24 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi James and guys,
>
> Is
>
> https://github.com/rmannibucau/johnzon/commit/23dfc58e301fb87bb72bc8bb4cdeb16d05666d4e
> what you had in mind?
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mar. 1 janv. 2019 à 22:16, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > Agree, we just nees to ensure to not expose more than today internals
> > probably but i dont see any blockers :)
> >
> > Le mar. 1 janv. 2019 17:26, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com> a
> > écrit :
> >
> >> Well, ideally, the recursive one and the root one would use the same
> logic
> >> to map a JsonValue/JsonNumber -> Integer object, right?  Perhaps we need
> >> to
> >> converge all this together and save ourselves some code.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 1, 2019 at 11:19 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi James
> >> >
> >> > I likely need test cases to understand more the issue but long story
> >> short
> >> > one of the two method is recursive not the other so one must handle
> >> > primitives as root types and the other aq nested type. Historically
> >> > primitives were not possible root types so can be something to refind.
> >> >
> >> > Happy to review Jira+pr to be more accurate if needed.
> >> >
> >> > Le mar. 1 janv. 2019 16:31, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com>
> a
> >> > écrit :
> >> >
> >> > > I am looking at JOHNZON-177 and I have noticed that we seem to be
> >> mapping
> >> > > primitives inconsistently inside the same class.
> >> > > MappingParserImpl.toObject() and MappingParserImpl.readObject() both
> >> > > contain special logic for handling longs and ints.  Why wouldn't we
> >> want
> >> > to
> >> > > handle these types consistently regardless of where they're used
> >> (fields
> >> > or
> >> > > the root type)?
> >> > >
> >> > > I have included code to handle the overflow/underflow case with a
> nice
> >> > > error message and that works fine when I added tests to the
> >> > > DefaultMappingTest from the JSON-B module.  However, I found that
> >> > > MapperTest seems to already have similar tests for invalid long/int
> >> > > values.  As I trace the logic, it doesn't hit my new code.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message