Seems good to me. Unit test should confirm symmetry between the two methods too.
Of interest: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do;jsessionid=291000e179b5162d5ae0d03c598e0:WuuT?bug_id=6176992 Hen On 8/2/07, Oliver Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > for some tasks related to reflection and method invocation I need the > counter part of the ClassUtils.primitiveToWrapper() method: > > /** > * Returns the corresponding primitive type if cls is a wrapper > * class and null otherwise. > */ > Class wrapperToPrimitive(Class cls) > > If this is considered a useful extension to ClassUtils, I can provide a > patch and unit tests. > > My use case is that I need to invoke a method, and I only have the name > and an array of parameter values (not the exact parameter types). So I > have to check based on the types of the current parameters if a method > signature is compatible. If the signature contains primitive types, the > current parameter values will be wrapper types; these have to be unboxed. > > Does this make sense? > > Oliver > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
