I don't see how people would nicely have access to the right bridge
implementation
On 3 sept. 09, at 17:30, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
>
> That would be cool but realistically we need to accept Object
> unless somehow
> we can convey the "expected" type(s) of a field bridge using
> generics or
> something. SOmebody has an idea on how the API would look like?
> probably something like
> <T> on(String field, Class<T>) ...
>
> on("field", Date.class).from(new Date()).
I didn't mean that the method signature should be aware of the type,
Object is fine;
from( Object lowerBoundary ); //automatically finds out the
StringBridge from the BridgeFactory
from( Object lowerBoundary, StringBridge ); //overrides ths
StringBridge selection
Even better making StringBridge generic we get typesafety:
<T> void from(T lowerBoundary, StringBridge<T> bridge)