2013/9/4 Hardy Ferentschik
>
> On 3 Jan 2013, at 4:10 PM, Emmanuel Bernard
> wrote:
>
> > Something like c makes sense.
> > It similar to the notion of converter in JPA.
> >
> > But why not the following style of interfaces
> >
> >interface Convert {
> >To convert(From);
> >}
>
>
On 3 Jan 2013, at 4:10 PM, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
> Something like c makes sense.
> It similar to the notion of converter in JPA.
>
> But why not the following style of interfaces
>
>interface Convert {
>To convert(From);
>}
Going back to Emmanuel mentioning @Convert. I am
> Another use case may be Optional from JDK 8:
>
> @Size(min = 5)
> Optional name;
Is another upcoming change not "type annotations" which would allow
Optional<@Size(min = 5) String>? That would of course be the preferable
solution.
--hardy
2013/9/4 Emmanuel Bernard
> On Wed 2013-09-04 9:26, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> > 2013/9/4 Emmanuel Bernard
> >
> > > On Wed 2013-09-04 8:27, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> > > > 2013/9/3 Emmanuel Bernard
> > > >
> > > > > Something like c makes sense.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ok.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
On Wed 2013-09-04 9:26, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> 2013/9/4 Emmanuel Bernard
>
> > On Wed 2013-09-04 8:27, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> > > 2013/9/3 Emmanuel Bernard
> > >
> > > > Something like c makes sense.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ok.
> > >
> > >
> > > > It similar to the notion of converter in JPA.
>
2013/9/4 Emmanuel Bernard
> On Wed 2013-09-04 8:27, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> > 2013/9/3 Emmanuel Bernard
> >
> > > Something like c makes sense.
> > >
> >
> > Ok.
> >
> >
> > > It similar to the notion of converter in JPA.
> > >
> > > But why not the following style of interfaces
> > >
> > >
2013/9/4 Gunnar Morling
> (using correct list now)
>
>
> 2013/9/3 Hardy Ferentschik
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3 Sep 2013, at 15:58, Gunnar Morling wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Yesterday George Gastaldi from the Forge team approached me regarding
>> the
>> > application of constraints to "wrapped" pro
On Wed 2013-09-04 8:27, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> 2013/9/3 Emmanuel Bernard
>
> > Something like c makes sense.
> >
>
> Ok.
>
>
> > It similar to the notion of converter in JPA.
> >
> > But why not the following style of interfaces
> >
> > interface Convert {
> > To convert(From);
>
(using correct list now)
2013/9/3 Hardy Ferentschik
>
>
>
>
> On 3 Sep 2013, at 15:58, Gunnar Morling wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Yesterday George Gastaldi from the Forge team approached me regarding the
> > application of constraints to "wrapped" properties. Their situation is
> the
> > followin
2013/9/3 Emmanuel Bernard
> Something like c makes sense.
>
Ok.
> It similar to the notion of converter in JPA.
>
> But why not the following style of interfaces
>
> interface Convert {
> To convert(From);
> }
>
Yes, thinking more about it, it probably makes sense to support m
Something like c makes sense.
It similar to the notion of converter in JPA.
But why not the following style of interfaces
interface Convert {
To convert(From);
}
On Tue 2013-09-03 15:58, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Yesterday George Gastaldi from the Forge team approached me
Hi,
Yesterday George Gastaldi from the Forge team approached me regarding the
application of constraints to "wrapped" properties. Their situation is the
following:
...
@Size(min=3, max=10)
UIInput name;
...
Here, UInput is some kind of UI component, wrapping the actual property
v
12 matches
Mail list logo
