commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Herve Quiroz <>
Subject Re: [CLI] 2.0 Proposal
Date Mon, 18 Aug 2003 15:53:18 GMT
Hi Rob,

Months ago, I suggested using [functor] for such a purpose. Don't know
if you remember. Here's a quick link:

And you may still provide standard type checkers and converters using the
proposed framework.

I understand that [functor] would add another dependency to [CLI]. But
it could easily become a "soft dependency" (required to build but not
necessarily to run). The main problem is (IMHO) that [functor] is still
in the sandbox and thus there's no official binary release (yet).



On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, Rob Oxspring wrote:

> I'd envisaged the conversion String->Integer to be handled by some IntegerValidator
class attached to the Argument.  If this pattern
> is chosen then I'm not sure how practical overloaded methods would be - the range of
types that could be returned would be infinite
> and we'd have to think about where to draw the line before the number of convenience
methods grows too big.  I guess the sensible
> place to draw that line would be for the Java primitives as anything else can easily
be cast from an Object anyway.
> Of course this is ignoring the fact that an XML configuration would have the full knowledge
of which types were needed where.  To be
> honest though I really need to think about the xml2cli thing.  I like the idea in principle
but I'm really struggling to get a
> handle on what input would be supplied, what might be generated and how the client code
would interact with cli to respond to the
> chosen options.  The end points are still to blurry in my head to see what transformation
is needed.  But I'll switch the xml stuff
> to a new thread.
> Rob

View raw message