Oh you prefer the ability to configure separately ser and deser??
I am in favor of not doing so and just have withEncoding(..)
2015-03-16 14:27 GMT+01:00 Przemyslaw Bielicki <pbielicki_at_gmail.com>:
> +1 for readEncoding and writeEncoding
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Martin Grebac <martin.grebac_at_oracle.com>
> wrote:
> > On 16.03.15 14:09, Eugen Cepoi wrote:
> >>
> >> 2015-03-16 13:54 GMT+01:00 Martin Grebac <martin.grebac_at_oracle.com
> >> <mailto:martin.grebac_at_oracle.com>>:
> >>
> >> On 12.03.15 17:36, Eugen Cepoi wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey Martins,
> >>
> >> Quick feedback on the API.
> >>
> >> I don't like much the to/from in JsonbConfig. At least for the
> >> formatting it is obvious that it exists only during
> serialization.
> >>
> >> What would be the suggestion?
> >>
> >>
> >> When the config is valable only for ser or deser, just use the config
> name
> >> (+ maybe some prefix use/with/etc). And about configs that exist for
> both
> >> ser and deser I am not sure. I hesitate between:
> >> - don't allow to configure a same instance with different ser and deser
> >> configs => we can then use the same naming strategy as previously
> >
> > There are implementations which allow this to be configured separately,
> but
> > I still find very little benefit in it. This seems like a rare case and
> you
> > can achieve the same with 2 differently configured Jsonb instances. My
> vote
> > would be to not allow this, in my local changes I'd change this to
> > withEncoding, withFormating.
> >
> >> - provide the ability to configure separately ser/de => prefix with
> >> serializationEncoding/deserializationEncoding
> >
> > If, then I'd prefer something shorter, like readEncoding and
> writeEncoding.
> >
> >> - keep as it is
> >>
> >> toJson/fromJson look a bit strange as they are "active terms", working
> >> well when doing the action in Jsonb but less for configuration, that's
> >> probably why I don't like it much. What do others think?
> >
> > Agree with the active term, this needs correction.
> >
> > MartiNG
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Not sure ConfigException is needed, I mean sure in some case
> >> we could throw this exception, but in practice maybe no one
> >> will. Also in multiple places I see IllegalArgumentEx, and it
> >> makes sense, we could same way use other existing exceptions -
> >> instead of ConfigEx.
> >> getProperty could return an Optional and throw an exception
> >> only if the arg is null.
> >>
> >> Both sound good to me, will apply unless hear otherwise.
> >>
> >> We could also add an option to skip null during serialization
> >> in the config.
> >>
> >> We'll handle this separately, but I agree.
> >>
> >> In JsonbBuilder, the newBuilder related to JsonbProvider are a
> >> bit redundant as we also have similar method inside the
> >> provider. But from another side, it provides a single entry
> >> point - this is good. This makes the API more easy to use.
> >>
> >> I didn't read the javadoc carefully.
> >>
> >> About the examples... well they are just examples :)
> >>
> >> That's why I'd like to focus you more on the spec pdf itself at
> >> this point ;)
> >> MartiNG
> >>
> >>
> >> Eugen
> >>
> >>
> >> 2015-03-12 16:46 GMT+01:00 Martin Grebac
> >> <martin.grebac_at_oracle.com <mailto:martin.grebac_at_oracle.com>
> >> <mailto:martin.grebac_at_oracle.com
> >>
> >> <mailto:martin.grebac_at_oracle.com>>>:
> >>
> >> Just would like to explicitly point to the spec document
> >> itself in
> >> this branch:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://java.net/projects/jsonb-spec/sources/git/content/spec/spec.pdf?rev=da7db533076856699cec49a4eebd300b9f4a7230
> >>
> >> MartiNG
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12.03.15 16:35, Martin Vojtek wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Experts,
> >>
> >> there has been a lot of changes recently in
> >> default_mapping.
> >> This completes the second iteration of default mapping
> >> proposal.
> >>
> >> Generics and integration with JSON Processing is not
> >> part of
> >> this discussion.
> >>
> >> Please take a look and feel free to express your point
> >> of view.
> >>
> >> https://github.com/json-binding/spec/tree/default_mapping
> >>
> >> Looking forward to your feedback.
> >>
> >> MartinV
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -- Martin Grebac, SW Engineering Manager
> >> Oracle Czech, Prague
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Martin Grebac, SW Engineering Manager
> > Oracle Czech, Prague
> >
>