5:51 a.m.
Experts,
another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368, which is about the
name of path nodes representing return values.
As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in that case.
Question is, whether we should return something more meaningful, and if so,
which value.
The RI used to return "$retval" before we change this to match the spec.
Another obvious option would be "returnValue". Having a standardized node
name for return value nodes would also help with better toString()
implementations for j.v.Path (although that's not standardized).
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
--Gunnar
[1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
8:53 a.m.
Hi,
I always liked $retval or maybe just retval. In the end we are also using arg0, arg1, etc.
I like the shorter retval better than returnValue, because I think it fits better with
arg<number>.
The '$' tried to denote somehow that this is a special name value, but I guess
this could be just dropped.
--Hardy
On 8 Jan 2013, at 12:51 PM, Gunnar Morling <gunnar(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
Experts,
another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368, which is about the name of path
nodes representing return values.
As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in that case. Question is, whether
we should return something more meaningful, and if so, which value.
The RI used to return "$retval" before we change this to match the spec.
Another obvious option would be "returnValue". Having a standardized node name
for return value nodes would also help with better toString() implementations for j.v.Path
(although that's not standardized).
Any thoughts?
9:07 a.m.
What if there is a property or method called "returnValue"? I think the
constant string returned should contain a character that is not legal
for java identifier names. E.g. a white space.
seb
On 08.02.2013 12:51, Gunnar Morling wrote:
Experts,
another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368, which is about
the name of path nodes representing return values.
As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in that case.
Question is, whether we should return something more meaningful, and
if so, which value.
The RI used to return "$retval" before we change this to match the
spec. Another obvious option would be "returnValue". Having a
standardized node name for return value nodes would also help with
better toString() implementations for j.v.Path (although that's not
standardized).
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
--Gunnar
[1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
9:21 a.m.
I don't want to introduce a name for the return value to allow things like
if(node.getName.equals("retval")) {
ReturnValueDescriptor descriptor = (ReturnValueDescriptor) node.getElementDescriptor();
}
The actual type of a node is still given by it ElementDescriptor. The name cannot be used
for that. It is more for convenience
and "nice" toString implementation. Yes it could be ambiguous, but I don't
think it matters. Any code relying on the property path
as string is potentially wrong anyways. A white space seems odd, especially in the light
of toString.
In that light $retval might be a legal java identifier, but chances are slim someone uses
it.
--Hardy
On 8 Jan 2013, at 4:07 PM, Sebastian Thomschke <sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de> wrote:
What if there is a property or method called "returnValue"?
I think the constant string returned should contain a character that is not legal for java
identifier names. E.g. a white space.
seb
On 08.02.2013 12:51, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> Experts,
>
> another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368, which is about the name of
path nodes representing return values.
>
> As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in that case. Question is,
whether we should return something more meaningful, and if so, which value.
>
> The RI used to return "$retval" before we change this to match the spec.
Another obvious option would be "returnValue". Having a standardized node name
for return value nodes would also help with better toString() implementations for j.v.Path
(although that's not standardized).
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Gunnar
>
> [1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
>
> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
11:19 a.m.
I am somewhat attracted to Sebastian's suggestion of illegal identifier
characters. My suggestion would be "<result>".
Matt
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Hardy Ferentschik <hardy(a)hibernate.org>wrote:
I don't want to introduce a name for the return value to allow
things like
if(node.getName.equals("retval")) {
ReturnValueDescriptor descriptor = (ReturnValueDescriptor)
node.getElementDescriptor();
}
The actual type of a node is still given by it ElementDescriptor. The name
cannot be used for that. It is more for convenience
and "nice" toString implementation. Yes it could be ambiguous, but I don't
think it matters. Any code relying on the property path
as string is potentially wrong anyways. A white space seems odd,
especially in the light of toString.
In that light $retval might be a legal java identifier, but chances are
slim someone uses it.
--Hardy
On 8 Jan 2013, at 4:07 PM, Sebastian Thomschke <sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de>
wrote:
> What if there is a property or method called "returnValue"? I think the
constant string returned should contain a character that is not legal for
java identifier names. E.g. a white space.
>
> seb
>
> On 08.02.2013 12:51, Gunnar Morling wrote:
>> Experts,
>>
>> another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368, which is about
the name of path nodes representing return values.
>>
>> As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in that case.
Question is, whether we should return something more meaningful, and if so,
which value.
>>
>> The RI used to return "$retval" before we change this to match the
spec. Another obvious option would be "returnValue". Having a standardized
node name for return value nodes would also help with better toString()
implementations for j.v.Path (although that's not standardized).
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --Gunnar
>>
>> [1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
>>
>> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
12:09 p.m.
I am not a big fan of the retval which reminds me of Gollum skeaping his
name ;)
- <return value>
- <return>
- (return value)
- (return)
I think I like <return value> the best.
As Hardy said, the name is not critical as nodes are identified by their
elementDescriptor.kind.
Emmanuel
On Fri 2013-02-08 11:19, Matt Benson wrote:
I am somewhat attracted to Sebastian's suggestion of illegal
identifier
characters. My suggestion would be "<result>".
Matt
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Hardy Ferentschik <hardy(a)hibernate.org>wrote:
> I don't want to introduce a name for the return value to allow things like
>
> if(node.getName.equals("retval")) {
> ReturnValueDescriptor descriptor = (ReturnValueDescriptor)
> node.getElementDescriptor();
> }
>
> The actual type of a node is still given by it ElementDescriptor. The name
> cannot be used for that. It is more for convenience
> and "nice" toString implementation. Yes it could be ambiguous, but I
don't
> think it matters. Any code relying on the property path
> as string is potentially wrong anyways. A white space seems odd,
> especially in the light of toString.
>
> In that light $retval might be a legal java identifier, but chances are
> slim someone uses it.
>
> --Hardy
>
>
> On 8 Jan 2013, at 4:07 PM, Sebastian Thomschke <sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de>
> wrote:
>
> > What if there is a property or method called "returnValue"? I think
the
> constant string returned should contain a character that is not legal for
> java identifier names. E.g. a white space.
> >
> > seb
> >
> > On 08.02.2013 12:51, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> >> Experts,
> >>
> >> another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368, which is about
> the name of path nodes representing return values.
> >>
> >> As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in that case.
> Question is, whether we should return something more meaningful, and if so,
> which value.
> >>
> >> The RI used to return "$retval" before we change this to match
the
> spec. Another obvious option would be "returnValue". Having a
standardized
> node name for return value nodes would also help with better toString()
> implementations for j.v.Path (although that's not standardized).
> >>
> >> Any thoughts?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> --Gunnar
> >>
> >> [1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> >>
> >> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> > beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
5:03 a.m.
+1 for <return value>.
--Gunnar
2013/2/8 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org>
I am not a big fan of the retval which reminds me of Gollum skeaping
his
name ;)
- <return value>
- <return>
- (return value)
- (return)
I think I like <return value> the best.
As Hardy said, the name is not critical as nodes are identified by their
elementDescriptor.kind.
Emmanuel
On Fri 2013-02-08 11:19, Matt Benson wrote:
> I am somewhat attracted to Sebastian's suggestion of illegal identifier
> characters. My suggestion would be "<result>".
>
> Matt
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Hardy Ferentschik <hardy(a)hibernate.org
>wrote:
>
> > I don't want to introduce a name for the return value to allow things
like
> >
> > if(node.getName.equals("retval")) {
> > ReturnValueDescriptor descriptor = (ReturnValueDescriptor)
> > node.getElementDescriptor();
> > }
> >
> > The actual type of a node is still given by it ElementDescriptor. The
name
> > cannot be used for that. It is more for convenience
> > and "nice" toString implementation. Yes it could be ambiguous, but I
don't
> > think it matters. Any code relying on the property path
> > as string is potentially wrong anyways. A white space seems odd,
> > especially in the light of toString.
> >
> > In that light $retval might be a legal java identifier, but chances are
> > slim someone uses it.
> >
> > --Hardy
> >
> >
> > On 8 Jan 2013, at 4:07 PM, Sebastian Thomschke <
sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > What if there is a property or method called "returnValue"? I
think
the
> > constant string returned should contain a character that is not legal
for
> > java identifier names. E.g. a white space.
> > >
> > > seb
> > >
> > > On 08.02.2013 12:51, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> > >> Experts,
> > >>
> > >> another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368, which is
about
> > the name of path nodes representing return values.
> > >>
> > >> As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in that case.
> > Question is, whether we should return something more meaningful, and
if so,
> > which value.
> > >>
> > >> The RI used to return "$retval" before we change this to
match the
> > spec. Another obvious option would be "returnValue". Having a
standardized
> > node name for return value nodes would also help with better toString()
> > implementations for j.v.Path (although that's not standardized).
> > >>
> > >> Any thoughts?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> --Gunnar
> > >>
> > >> [1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> > >>
> > >> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> > > beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> > beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
8:05 a.m.
+1 for "<return value>" too
seb
On 09.02.2013 12:03, Gunnar Morling wrote:
+1 for <return value>.
--Gunnar
2013/2/8 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org
<mailto:emmanuel@hibernate.org>>
I am not a big fan of the retval which reminds me of Gollum
skeaping his
name ;)
- <return value>
- <return>
- (return value)
- (return)
I think I like <return value> the best.
As Hardy said, the name is not critical as nodes are identified by
their
elementDescriptor.kind.
Emmanuel
On Fri 2013-02-08 11:19, Matt Benson wrote:
> I am somewhat attracted to Sebastian's suggestion of illegal
identifier
> characters. My suggestion would be "<result>".
>
> Matt
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Hardy Ferentschik
<hardy(a)hibernate.org <mailto:hardy@hibernate.org>>wrote:
>
> > I don't want to introduce a name for the return value to allow
things like
> >
> > if(node.getName.equals("retval")) {
> > ReturnValueDescriptor descriptor = (ReturnValueDescriptor)
> > node.getElementDescriptor();
> > }
> >
> > The actual type of a node is still given by it
ElementDescriptor. The name
> > cannot be used for that. It is more for convenience
> > and "nice" toString implementation. Yes it could be ambiguous,
but I don't
> > think it matters. Any code relying on the property path
> > as string is potentially wrong anyways. A white space seems odd,
> > especially in the light of toString.
> >
> > In that light $retval might be a legal java identifier, but
chances are
> > slim someone uses it.
> >
> > --Hardy
> >
> >
> > On 8 Jan 2013, at 4:07 PM, Sebastian Thomschke
<sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de <mailto:sebastian.thomschke@web.de>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > What if there is a property or method called "returnValue"?
I think the
> > constant string returned should contain a character that is
not legal for
> > java identifier names. E.g. a white space.
> > >
> > > seb
> > >
> > > On 08.02.2013 12 <tel:08.02.2013%2012>:51, Gunnar Morling
wrote:
> > >> Experts,
> > >>
> > >> another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368,
which is about
> > the name of path nodes representing return values.
> > >>
> > >> As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in
that case.
> > Question is, whether we should return something more
meaningful, and if so,
> > which value.
> > >>
> > >> The RI used to return "$retval" before we change this
to
match the
> > spec. Another obvious option would be "returnValue". Having a
standardized
> > node name for return value nodes would also help with better
toString()
> > implementations for j.v.Path (although that's not standardized).
> > >>
> > >> Any thoughts?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> --Gunnar
> > >>
> > >> [1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
> > >>
> > >>
4:42 a.m.
Personally I don't like the whitespace in <return value>. I would prefer
<return>.
However, if the majority agrees to <return value> that's fine with me. I like
the the use of <>.
--Hardy
On 9 Jan 2013, at 3:05 PM, Sebastian Thomschke <sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de> wrote:
+1 for "<return value>" too
seb
On 09.02.2013 12:03, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> +1 for <return value>.
>
> --Gunnar
>
>
>
> 2013/2/8 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org>
> I am not a big fan of the retval which reminds me of Gollum skeaping his
> name ;)
>
> - <return value>
> - <return>
> - (return value)
> - (return)
>
> I think I like <return value> the best.
>
> As Hardy said, the name is not critical as nodes are identified by their
> elementDescriptor.kind.
>
> Emmanuel
>
> On Fri 2013-02-08 11:19, Matt Benson wrote:
> > I am somewhat attracted to Sebastian's suggestion of illegal identifier
> > characters. My suggestion would be "<result>".
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Hardy Ferentschik
<hardy(a)hibernate.org>wrote:
> >
> > > I don't want to introduce a name for the return value to allow things
like
> > >
> > > if(node.getName.equals("retval")) {
> > > ReturnValueDescriptor descriptor = (ReturnValueDescriptor)
> > > node.getElementDescriptor();
> > > }
> > >
> > > The actual type of a node is still given by it ElementDescriptor. The name
> > > cannot be used for that. It is more for convenience
> > > and "nice" toString implementation. Yes it could be ambiguous,
but I don't
> > > think it matters. Any code relying on the property path
> > > as string is potentially wrong anyways. A white space seems odd,
> > > especially in the light of toString.
> > >
> > > In that light $retval might be a legal java identifier, but chances are
> > > slim someone uses it.
> > >
> > > --Hardy
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8 Jan 2013, at 4:07 PM, Sebastian Thomschke
<sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > What if there is a property or method called "returnValue"?
I think the
> > > constant string returned should contain a character that is not legal for
> > > java identifier names. E.g. a white space.
> > > >
> > > > seb
> > > >
> > > > On 08.02.2013 12:51, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> > > >> Experts,
> > > >>
> > > >> another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368, which is
about
> > > the name of path nodes representing return values.
> > > >>
> > > >> As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in that
case.
> > > Question is, whether we should return something more meaningful, and if
so,
> > > which value.
> > > >>
> > > >> The RI used to return "$retval" before we change this to
match the
> > > spec. Another obvious option would be "returnValue". Having a
standardized
> > > node name for return value nodes would also help with better toString()
> > > implementations for j.v.Path (although that's not standardized).
> > > >>
> > > >> Any thoughts?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >>
> > > >> --Gunnar
> > > >>
> > > >> [1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
> > > >>
> > > >>
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
12:55 p.m.
Come on, Hardy, join me in supporting <result> which avoids whitespace and
encompasses the full meaning of "return value". :)
Matt
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Hardy Ferentschik <hardy(a)hibernate.org>wrote:
Personally I don't like the whitespace in <return value>. I
would prefer
<return>.
However, if the majority agrees to <return value> that's fine with me. I
like the the use of <>.
--Hardy
On 9 Jan 2013, at 3:05 PM, Sebastian Thomschke <sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de>
wrote:
> +1 for "<return value>" too
>
> seb
>
> On 09.02.2013 12:03, Gunnar Morling wrote:
>> +1 for <return value>.
>>
>> --Gunnar
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/2/8 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org>
>> I am not a big fan of the retval which reminds me of Gollum skeaping his
>> name ;)
>>
>> - <return value>
>> - <return>
>> - (return value)
>> - (return)
>>
>> I think I like <return value> the best.
>>
>> As Hardy said, the name is not critical as nodes are identified by their
>> elementDescriptor.kind.
>>
>> Emmanuel
>>
>> On Fri 2013-02-08 11:19, Matt Benson wrote:
>> > I am somewhat attracted to Sebastian's suggestion of illegal
identifier
>> > characters. My suggestion would be "<result>".
>> >
>> > Matt
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Hardy Ferentschik <
hardy(a)hibernate.org>wrote:
>> >
>> > > I don't want to introduce a name for the return value to allow
things like
>> > >
>> > > if(node.getName.equals("retval")) {
>> > > ReturnValueDescriptor descriptor = (ReturnValueDescriptor)
>> > > node.getElementDescriptor();
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > The actual type of a node is still given by it ElementDescriptor.
The name
>> > > cannot be used for that. It is more for convenience
>> > > and "nice" toString implementation. Yes it could be
ambiguous, but
I don't
>> > > think it matters. Any code relying on the property path
>> > > as string is potentially wrong anyways. A white space seems odd,
>> > > especially in the light of toString.
>> > >
>> > > In that light $retval might be a legal java identifier, but chances
are
>> > > slim someone uses it.
>> > >
>> > > --Hardy
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 8 Jan 2013, at 4:07 PM, Sebastian Thomschke <
sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > What if there is a property or method called
"returnValue"? I
think the
>> > > constant string returned should contain a character that is not
legal for
>> > > java identifier names. E.g. a white space.
>> > > >
>> > > > seb
>> > > >
>> > > > On 08.02.2013 12:51, Gunnar Morling wrote:
>> > > >> Experts,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368, which
is
about
>> > > the name of path nodes representing return values.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in
that
case.
>> > > Question is, whether we should return something more meaningful,
and if so,
>> > > which value.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> The RI used to return "$retval" before we change
this to match
the
>> > > spec. Another obvious option would be "returnValue". Having
a
standardized
>> > > node name for return value nodes would also help with better
toString()
>> > > implementations for j.v.Path (although that's not standardized).
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Any thoughts?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Thanks,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> --Gunnar
>> > > >>
>> > > >> [1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
1:05 p.m.
If it should be human understandable I'm still for "<return value>"
but
for programmatic usage it may be even better to have a string identifier
as short as possible to avoid extensive string comparison operations.
Maybe even something like "<>" or even an empty string.
seb
On 10.02.2013 19:55, Matt Benson wrote:
Come on, Hardy, join me in supporting <result> which avoids
whitespace
and encompasses the full meaning of "return value". :)
Matt
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Hardy Ferentschik
<hardy(a)hibernate.org <mailto:hardy@hibernate.org>> wrote:
Personally I don't like the whitespace in <return value>. I would
prefer <return>.
However, if the majority agrees to <return value> that's fine
with me. I like the the use of <>.
--Hardy
On 9 Jan 2013, at 3:05 PM, Sebastian Thomschke
<sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de <mailto:sebastian.thomschke@web.de>>
wrote:
> +1 for "<return value>" too
>
> seb
>
> On 09.02.2013 12:03, Gunnar Morling wrote:
>> +1 for <return value>.
>>
>> --Gunnar
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/2/8 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org
<mailto:emmanuel@hibernate.org>>
>> I am not a big fan of the retval which reminds me of Gollum
skeaping his
>> name ;)
>>
>> - <return value>
>> - <return>
>> - (return value)
>> - (return)
>>
>> I think I like <return value> the best.
>>
>> As Hardy said, the name is not critical as nodes are identified
by their
>> elementDescriptor.kind.
>>
>> Emmanuel
>>
>> On Fri 2013-02-08 11:19, Matt Benson wrote:
>> > I am somewhat attracted to Sebastian's suggestion of illegal
identifier
>> > characters. My suggestion would be "<result>".
>> >
>> > Matt
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Hardy Ferentschik
<hardy(a)hibernate.org <mailto:hardy@hibernate.org>>wrote:
>> >
>> > > I don't want to introduce a name for the return value to
allow things like
>> > >
>> > > if(node.getName.equals("retval")) {
>> > > ReturnValueDescriptor descriptor =
(ReturnValueDescriptor)
>> > > node.getElementDescriptor();
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > The actual type of a node is still given by it
ElementDescriptor. The name
>> > > cannot be used for that. It is more for convenience
>> > > and "nice" toString implementation. Yes it could be
ambiguous, but I don't
>> > > think it matters. Any code relying on the property path
>> > > as string is potentially wrong anyways. A white space seems
odd,
>> > > especially in the light of toString.
>> > >
>> > > In that light $retval might be a legal java identifier, but
chances are
>> > > slim someone uses it.
>> > >
>> > > --Hardy
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 8 Jan 2013, at 4:07 PM, Sebastian Thomschke
<sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de <mailto:sebastian.thomschke@web.de>>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > What if there is a property or method called
"returnValue"? I think the
>> > > constant string returned should contain a character that is
not legal for
>> > > java identifier names. E.g. a white space.
>> > > >
>> > > > seb
>> > > >
>> > > > On 08.02.2013 12:51, Gunnar Morling wrote:
>> > > >> Experts,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> another issue where we need some feedback is BVAL-368,
which is about
>> > > the name of path nodes representing return values.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null in
that case.
>> > > Question is, whether we should return something more
meaningful, and if so,
>> > > which value.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> The RI used to return "$retval" before we
change this to
match the
>> > > spec. Another obvious option would be "returnValue".
Having
a standardized
>> > > node name for return value nodes would also help with
better toString()
>> > > implementations for j.v.Path (although that's not
standardized).
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Any thoughts?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Thanks,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> --Gunnar
>> > > >>
>> > > >> [1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:beanvalidation-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:beanvalidation-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
6:24 a.m.
For programmatic usage, you should use the elementKind enum which will
give you the most accurate and best performance.
Let me use my spec lead hammer and go for <return value>.
Emmanuel
On Sun 2013-02-10 20:05, Sebastian Thomschke wrote:
If it should be human understandable I'm still for
"<return value>"
but for programmatic usage it may be even better to have a string
identifier as short as possible to avoid extensive string comparison
operations. Maybe even something like "<>" or even an empty string.
seb
On 10.02.2013 19:55, Matt Benson wrote:
>Come on, Hardy, join me in supporting <result> which avoids
>whitespace and encompasses the full meaning of "return value". :)
>
>Matt
>
>
>On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Hardy Ferentschik
><hardy(a)hibernate.org <mailto:hardy@hibernate.org>> wrote:
>
> Personally I don't like the whitespace in <return value>. I would
> prefer <return>.
> However, if the majority agrees to <return value> that's fine
> with me. I like the the use of <>.
>
> --Hardy
>
>
> On 9 Jan 2013, at 3:05 PM, Sebastian Thomschke
> <sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de <mailto:sebastian.thomschke@web.de>>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for "<return value>" too
> >
> > seb
> >
> > On 09.02.2013 12:03, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> >> +1 for <return value>.
> >>
> >> --Gunnar
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2013/2/8 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel(a)hibernate.org
> <mailto:emmanuel@hibernate.org>>
> >> I am not a big fan of the retval which reminds me of Gollum
> skeaping his
> >> name ;)
> >>
> >> - <return value>
> >> - <return>
> >> - (return value)
> >> - (return)
> >>
> >> I think I like <return value> the best.
> >>
> >> As Hardy said, the name is not critical as nodes are identified
> by their
> >> elementDescriptor.kind.
> >>
> >> Emmanuel
> >>
> >> On Fri 2013-02-08 11:19, Matt Benson wrote:
> >> > I am somewhat attracted to Sebastian's suggestion of illegal
> identifier
> >> > characters. My suggestion would be "<result>".
> >> >
> >> > Matt
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Hardy Ferentschik
> <hardy(a)hibernate.org <mailto:hardy@hibernate.org>>wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > I don't want to introduce a name for the return value to
> allow things like
> >> > >
> >> > > if(node.getName.equals("retval")) {
> >> > > ReturnValueDescriptor descriptor =
> (ReturnValueDescriptor)
> >> > > node.getElementDescriptor();
> >> > > }
> >> > >
> >> > > The actual type of a node is still given by it
> ElementDescriptor. The name
> >> > > cannot be used for that. It is more for convenience
> >> > > and "nice" toString implementation. Yes it could be
> ambiguous, but I don't
> >> > > think it matters. Any code relying on the property path
> >> > > as string is potentially wrong anyways. A white space seems
> odd,
> >> > > especially in the light of toString.
> >> > >
> >> > > In that light $retval might be a legal java identifier, but
> chances are
> >> > > slim someone uses it.
> >> > >
> >> > > --Hardy
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On 8 Jan 2013, at 4:07 PM, Sebastian Thomschke
> <sebastian.thomschke(a)web.de <mailto:sebastian.thomschke@web.de>>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > What if there is a property or method called
> "returnValue"? I think the
> >> > > constant string returned should contain a character that is
> not legal for
> >> > > java identifier names. E.g. a white space.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > seb
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On 08.02.2013 12:51, Gunnar Morling wrote:
> >> > > >> Experts,
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> another issue where we need some feedback is
BVAL-368,
> which is about
> >> > > the name of path nodes representing return values.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> As per the current draft, Node#getName() returns null
in
> that case.
> >> > > Question is, whether we should return something more
> meaningful, and if so,
> >> > > which value.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> The RI used to return "$retval" before we
change this to
> match the
> >> > > spec. Another obvious option would be "returnValue".
Having
> a standardized
> >> > > node name for return value nodes would also help with
> better toString()
> >> > > implementations for j.v.Path (although that's not
> standardized).
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Any thoughts?
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Thanks,
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> --Gunnar
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> [1] https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-368
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> > beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:beanvalidation-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:beanvalidation-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>beanvalidation-dev mailing list
>beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
4709
days inactive
4712
days old
beanvalidation-dev@lists.jboss.org
11 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Emmanuel Bernard -
Gunnar Morling -
Hardy Ferentschik -
Matt Benson -
Sebastian Thomschke