On Apr 7, 2009, at 8:45 AM, Anissa Lam wrote:
>
>> asadmin some-command ... --enabled=${ENABLED} domain.xml will
>> record ${ENABLED} as the value of that setting
>
> I have a question here. So, in domain.xml, as Admin Console is
> still using AMX to get the value of this enabled attribute, will
> it return ${ENABLED} or the translated value ? And if later
> when the REST API is available, what will be returned ?
> I hope i don't need to worry about having to resolve every single
> attribute returned.
AMX and REST always return the translated values.
>
> thanks
> Anissa.
>
> Kedar Mhaswade wrote:
>> Tim,
>>
>> I am sure sure how framework can handle this.
>> This is because injection processing takes into account
>> the type of fields/methods that are annotated with @Param. It's
>> not clear to me how command can ask for untranslated value
>> explicitly.
>> By default, whatever the command line provided should be given to
>> command
>> implementation, as-is.
>>
>> Now, we can punt on all of it and say that if you wanted to use
>> variable
>> expansion, use the "asadmin set" method which allows strings.
>> But then it would be a two-step process for a user. So, we have got
>> to
>> make a choice here. Certainly, I like typed injection, but I am
>> just not
>> sure how framework can handle it.
>>
>> This also casts doubts on
>> public String acceptableValues() default "";
>> field in @Param, because potentially, any value like "${...}" is an
>> acceptable
>> value.
>>
>> -Kedar
>>
>> PS - Note that all @Configured mutators are typeless. They only
>> accept strings
>> for this very reason.
>>
>> Tim Quinn wrote:
>>> Kedar,
>>>
>>> Kedar Mhaswade wrote:
>>>> V3 asadmin command developers:
>>>>
>>>> It's important to note that non-String fields in your command
>>>> implementation
>>>> classes are not to be annotated with annotation @Param.
>>>>
>>>> This is to support the variable expansion (token) support we have
>>>> for various values in domain.xml, for which options should be
>>>> replaced
>>>> verbatim.
>>> If I understand correctly, you are saying that if I use
>>>
>>> asadmin some-command ... --enabled=${ENABLED}
>>>
>>> that domain.xml will record ${ENABLED} as the value of that
>>> setting and not the translation of ENABLED at that moment. I
>>> certainly see the value of that.
>>>
>>> Yet when the command implementation class is invoked, hasn't the
>>> framework already substituted the current value for the
>>> placeholder as part of the injection processing (unless I've asked
>>> for the raw untranslated value explicitly)? If not, it should.
>>>
>>> And, if the framework can substitute the token's current value as
>>> it injects the values into the command class, why not have the
>>> framework also do the type conversion and error handling itself,
>>> which ensures that it is done and done in a coherent and uniform
>>> way? That would be preferable to depending on each individual
>>> command implementation class to do each param conversion itself
>>> and to detect and handle conversion errors nicely.
>>>
>>>
>>> Just my US$0.02 worth.
>>>
>>> - Tim
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>