[rules-dev] Implicit package imports

[Wolfgang Laun]

Surely using the (not extremely long) full class path would avoid all import
callisthenics?
-W

On 7 May 2011 23:42, Michael Anstis <michael.anstis at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm fixing a bug in all of Guvnors' guided editors:
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/GUVNOR-1362
>
> The existing problem is if a model Date field is set in one of the guided
> editors RHS we need to convert the String into a Date for use in the set
> Method (currently we attempt to pass the String which fails).
>
> I have a working solution however it requires the user to explicitly add a
> package import for "java.text.SimpleDateFormat" that handles the parsing.
> This can be accomplished through the UI.
>
> I have two options to remove the need for the user to do anything:-
>
> (1) Pre-process all rules to be included in the package, check if one uses
> Date in the RHS and if so add an import into the header. I'd need to
> pre-process all rules as the package DRL String is built linearly and by the
> time the package compiler gets to a rule that uses a Date in the RHS the
> header, including imports, has already been built.
>
> (2) Add (another) implicit import into *all* packages. I assume we already
> do something like this for the boxed primitives and some others (List?
> Collection? Map? etc).
>
> Before I venture into option (1) can any (core) developer advise (1) where
> can I add an additional implicit import (I assume the compiler somewhere),
> (2) is this simpler solution acceptable to the (core) developers?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-dev/attachments/20110508/baee108f/attachment-0001.html