[forge-dev] Adding a field of array type

[Ivan St. Ivanov]

Sure :-)

But not today, as I'm a bit sleepy (it's nearly 2am here in Bulgaria). :-)

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:35 AM, George Gastaldi <gegastaldi at gmail.com>wrote:

> Right, that could work.
> Fancy a pull request ? Test included please ! :)
>
> 2012/7/23 Ivan St. Ivanov <ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com>:
> > Maybe something like:
> >
> > private boolean fieldNeedsFQN(String typeName)
> >     String simpleName = Types.toSimpleName(typeName);
> >     // This works both with simple as well as with qualified names
> >     Import import = getOrigin().getImport(simpleName);
> >     if (import != null && !import.getQualifiedName().equals(typeName)) {
> >         return true;
> >     }
> >     return false;
> > }
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:14 AM, George Gastaldi <gegastaldi at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Ivan,
> >>
> >> Yeah, I have to agree with you, this is something that should be
> >> improved. I also don't like having FQN in field declarations.
> >> But, figuring it out how to avoid name clashes may be harder to
> >> implement than using this strategy.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> George Gastaldi
> >>
> >> 2012/7/23 Ivan St. Ivanov <ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com>:
> >> > Hi George,
> >> >
> >> > Yes, I realized that. So it's up to us to decide which option we take:
> >> >
> >> > 1) It is safe to have the fully qualified name in the field
> >> > declarations,
> >> > but it is kinda ugly
> >> > 2) Declaring the fields with non fully qualified names looks natural
> >> > (all of
> >> > us use this style), but it may produce class name clashes in one out
> of
> >> > 1000
> >> > or more cases. E.g. adding java.util.Date and java.sql.Date to a
> class.
> >> >
> >> > I don't mind to keep it in the current way. But when I show the
> >> > generated
> >> > classes to the people, they might get the feeling that something does
> >> > not
> >> > look like in their IDEs.
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Ivan
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:46 AM, George Gastaldi <
> gegastaldi at gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Ivan,
> >> >>
> >> >> Using the fully qualified name avoids class name conflicts, so it is
> >> >> much safer to use than to rely on imports only.
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards,
> >> >>
> >> >> George Gastaldi
> >> >>
> >> >> 2012/7/23 Ivan St. Ivanov <ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com>:
> >> >> > Hi Lincoln,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'm hacking now a solution. Something like:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > if (Types.isArray(simpleName))
> >> >> > {
> >> >> >     Name name = ast.newSimpleName(Types.stripArray(simpleName));
> >> >> >     Type typeOfArray = ast.newSimpleType(name);
> >> >> >     type = ast.newArrayType(typeNoArray);
> >> >> > }
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'm just trying to find the most suitable place of the above
> snippet
> >> >> > in
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > setType method. Maybe I'll do some refactoring of the existing
> code.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >  I noticed also that the code inside:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >       if (!Strings.areEqual(typeName, simpleName) &&
> requiresImport)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ...should also be touched to support arrays.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > BTW, we have the same issue with generic types as well. So I'm
> >> >> > looking
> >> >> > into
> >> >> > them too.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Cheers,
> >> >> > Ivan
> >> >> >
> >> >> > P.S. Don't you think that we should have the simple name (e.g.
> File)
> >> >> > in
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > field declaration instead of the whole type:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > right now it is:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > import java.io.File;
> >> >> >
> >> >> > public class Test {
> >> >> >
> >> >> >    private java.io.File file;
> >> >> >
> >> >> > }
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III
> >> >> > <lincolnbaxter at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Hey Ivan!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> You're correct, the JDT probably doesn't have a convenient method
> >> >> >> for
> >> >> >> this
> >> >> >> (it doesn't have much that is convenient,) but what are your
> >> >> >> proposed
> >> >> >> changes?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> ~Lincoln
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Ivan St. Ivanov
> >> >> >> <ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Hi folks,
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> I wonder is it possible to add a field to a JavaClass and to set
> an
> >> >> >>> array
> >> >> >>> as its type. The setType(String) method does not support arrays
> yet
> >> >> >>> and I
> >> >> >>> don't want to use the other two variants of this method (taking
> >> >> >>> Class
> >> >> >>> and
> >> >> >>> JavaResource parameters).
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> I looked at the mentioned method (setType(String)). And found a
> >> >> >>> suitable
> >> >> >>> place where I could add the support for arrays. However, I'm
> afraid
> >> >> >>> that
> >> >> >>> JDT's AST class does not have a convenient newArray....() method.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Or maybe I'm missing something?
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Cheers,
> >> >> >>> Ivan
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >> >>> forge-dev mailing list
> >> >> >>> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Lincoln Baxter, III
> >> >> >> http://ocpsoft.org
> >> >> >> "Simpler is better."
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> >> forge-dev mailing list
> >> >> >> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >> > forge-dev mailing list
> >> >> > forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >> >> >
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> forge-dev mailing list
> >> >> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > forge-dev mailing list
> >> > forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> forge-dev mailing list
> >> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > forge-dev mailing list
> > forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/forge-dev/attachments/20120724/d7c418cc/attachment-0001.html