RE: [Springframework-developer] non-String keys for map entries

[Alef A. <al...@jt...>]

Have we reached a conclusion on this one? There is a question on the =
forum about non-String keys in maps.

Alef


-----Original Message-----
From: spr...@li... =
[mailto:spr...@li...] On Behalf =
Of Colin Sampaleanu
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 5:07 AM
To: spr...@li...
Subject: Re: [Springframework-developer] non-String keys for map entries

btw Thomas, a few people have suggested a variation of your first choice =

below. However, while that covers having a key that's a bean reference,=20
it doesn't cover the case where it's defined inline (as a value or other =

type)...


tho...@tr... wrote:

>I too think this would be valuable.
>
>I'd like to keep it simple.  The following seems to me the most =
consistent with
>the current syntax and with the Map interface itself:
>
><map>
>  <entry keyref=3D"myBean">
>    <ref bean=3D"myTarget"/>
>  </entry>
></map>
>
>or=20
>
><map>
>  <entry>
>    <key>
>      <ref bean=3D"myKeyBean"/>
>    </key>
>    <value>
>      <ref bean=3D"myTargetBean"/>
>    </value>
>  </entry>
></map>
>
>This should also be valid, but I would not recommend using it:
>
><map>
>  <entry>
>    <key>
>      <ref bean=3D"myKeyBean"/>
>    </key>
>    <ref bean=3D"myTargetBean"/>
>  </entry>
></map>
>
>
>Thomas
>
>
>
>Quoting Colin Sampaleanu <col...@ex...>:
>
> =20
>
>>I agree it would be very good to have. I've been hit a few times by =
the=20
>>lack.
>>
>>I am ok with your syntax, given that probably most of the uses will=20
>>still be the simple case. An alternative would be to have another kind =

>>of entry allowed
>>
>><map>
>>  <complexentry>
>>    <key>
>>      <ref bean=3D"myKey"/>
>>    </key>
>>    <value>
>>      <ref bean=3D"myTarget"/>
>>    </value>
>>  </complexentry>
>></map>
>>
>>'complexentry' is just a name I came up with now. I don't really like =
it=20
>>or think it that suitable...
>>
>>Colin
>>
>>
>>j=FCrgen h=F6ller [werk3AT] wrote:
>>
>>   =20
>>
>>>A colleague of mine just suggested that <entry> tags in XML bean =
definitions
>>>     =20
>>>
>>should also support non-String keys: After all, a java.util.Map can =
take any
>>Object as key.
>>   =20
>>
>>>So instead of just the current:
>>>
>>><map>
>>> <entry key=3D"myKey">
>>>   <ref bean=3D"myTarget"/>
>>> </entry>
>>></map>
>>>
>>>We could also support something like the following:
>>>
>>><map>
>>> <entry>
>>>   <key>
>>>     <ref bean=3D"myKey"/>
>>>   </key>
>>>   <ref bean=3D"myTarget"/>
>>> </entry>
>>></map>
>>>
>>>The problem is the syntax: It looks odd to have the <ref> Map value =
at the
>>>     =20
>>>
>>same level as the <key> subtag, with the latter having a nested <ref>
>>again...
>>   =20
>>
>>>Any ideas?
>>>
>>>Juergen
>>>     =20
>>>




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. =

Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.=20
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D3149&alloc_id=3D8166&op=3Dclick
_______________________________________________
Springframework-developer mailing list
Spr...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer