With provider any pre-computations can be done once during deploy-time. With just converter you'd have to do these every single time you need the converter.
Marek
On Sep 18, 2012, at 3:41 AM, Bill Burke <bburke_at_redhat.com> wrote:
> I still don't get why we need ParamConverterProvider. Just widen fromString and toString
>
> ParamConverter<T> {
>
> fromString(Class type, Type genericType, Annotation[] annotations);
> toString(Object obj, Annotation[] annotations)
> }
>
> Correct me if i'm wrong, but the model with ParamConverterProvider is inefficient as you'd have to loop over every registered converter to until you got one that matched. Instead, you can match the type to the generic parameter passed when implementing the ParamConverter interface. Just like we do with ExceptionMapper.
>
> On 9/6/2012 8:49 AM, Marek Potociar wrote:
>> Please check the user comment in the corresponding issue for the motivation:
>> http://java.net/jira/browse/JAX_RS_SPEC-61
>>
>> Marek
>>
>> On Sep 4, 2012, at 6:38 PM, Sergey Beryozkin <sberyozkin_at_talend.com
>> <mailto:sberyozkin_at_talend.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> We have ParamConverterProvider and ParamConverter, I wonder do we
>>> really need the former ?
>>>
>>> Example, individual ExceptionMapper implementations can be registered
>>> as providers, why should ParamConverter implementations be created
>>> indirectly via ParamConverterProvider ?
>>>
>>> I can see ParamConverterProvider allows to find the providers for
>>> arguments like "List<Book>" - but do we really need it ?
>>>
>>> Sergey
>>
>
> --
> Bill Burke
> JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> http://bill.burkecentral.com