commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Eric Pugh" <ep...@upstate.com>
Subject RE: [configuration][PATCH]addProperty
Date Fri, 17 Oct 2003 08:31:18 GMT
Oliver,

I have applied your patch.  Do you want to check things out?  I also added
in some more maven reports.  I thought our coverage with unit tests was
going to be steller, but according to JCoverage, we only have 59% coverage
of the code base.

At any rate, let me know how things go..  I am updating the website as I
write this...

Eric

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oliver Heger [mailto:o.heger@qubix.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 1:58 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developer List; epugh@upstate.com
> Subject: [configuration][PATCH]addProperty
>
>
> Eric,
>
> I have created the patch for refactoring the addProperty() method.
> AbstractConfiguration.addProperty() now only handles
> collection and string
> properties with multiple values and then delegates to the abstract
> addPropertyDirect() method.
>
> The stuff with the containers was moved to
> BaseConfiguration.addPropertyDirect(). The unit tests run fine.
>
> There is a little thing more I changed: I made the nested
> Container class in
> AbstractConfiguration static. The reason is that I have a
> static nested
> class HierarchicalProperties.Node that needs to create instances of
> Container. This is impossible with Container being nonstatic
> unless I make
> the Node class nonstatic, too; but I don't like that because
> it would make
> usage of this class more complicated for clients of
> HierarchicalProperties
> (normally clients need not access this class directly, but
> there might be
> cases where it could make sense). Was there any specific
> reason for making
> Container nonstatic?
>
>
> Regards
> Oli
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eric Pugh" <epugh@upstate.com>
> To: "'Oliver Heger'" <o.heger@qubix.de>; "'Jakarta Commons
> Developers List'"
> <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 10:40 AM
> Subject: RE: [configuration]HierarchicalConfiguration
>
>
> > Oliver,
> >
> > So, if I understand properly, the reason is so that we
> refactor out the
> code
> > so that you don't have to do a cut'n'paste job from the
> > AbstractConfiguration to your new subclass..
> >
> > Seems reasonable enough..  Why don't you submit a patch
> with your next
> chunk
> > of code then?
> >
> > Oh, and the attachements came through okay for me!
> >
> > Eric
> >
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message