I also don't understand why the "targetClass.getEnumConstants()" is used
at all.
If you want to check that the "value" really is one of the enum
constants,
then calling "targetClass.isInstance(value)" is sufficient.
Given that all enums are effectively "final" classes with only private
constructors, any instance of an enum class must also be a member of the
"enumConstants" list.
This seems to be another case where the javadoc comment for this
interface
(which is therefore part of the JSF-API spec) is describing an
implementation
instead of describing a behaviour.
If you are going to change the javadoc (and therefore the API spec) I
would
rather see a clear description of the required "behaviour" only.
Perhaps something more like this:
<p>Convert the enum constant given by the <code>value</code>
argument into a String. If no target class argument has been
provided to the constructor of this instance, throw a
<code>ConverterException</code> containing the
{_at_link #ENUM_NO_CLASS_ID} message with proper parameters.
If the <code>value</code> argument is <code>null</code>,
return <code>null</code>.
If the value is an instance of the provided target class,
Return its string value (<code>value.toString()</code>).
Otherwise, throw a {_at_link ConverterException} containing the
{_at_link #ENUM_ID} message with proper parameters.</p>
----------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:40:30 -0500
From: Jason Lee <lee_at_iecokc.com>
Subject: [REVIEW] Fix for spec issue 172
Just out of curiosity, why use the break, then the test? Why not do
this?
for (int i=0; i<enumConstants.length; i++) {
if (enumConstants[i].equals(value)) {
return value.toString();
}
}
// No match found, so throw an exception
throw new ConverterException(
MessageFactory.getMessage(context,
ENUM_ID,
value,
value,
MessageFactory.getLabel(context,
component)));
-----
Jason Lee
Programmer/Analyst
http://www.iecokc.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger.Kitain_at_Sun.COM [mailto:Roger.Kitain_at_Sun.COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 2:55 PM
> To: dev_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
> Subject: [REVIEW] Fix for spec issue 172
>
>
https://javaserverfaces-spec-public.dev.java.net/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=
172
>
> Changes attached to issue.
>