Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago
Descriptor adds information about content unit (e.g. seconds, milliseconds,
dollars etc) as well as bounds (min/max values or permitted enumerations) on
both operations and attributes.
This could be supported by introducing a new Descriptor annotation type that
Operation and Property would inherit from, supporting these common attributes.
Quite a bit of work, so unless someone really needs this feature, I doubt it'll
make it into the code base anytime soon.
Original comment by morten.h...@gmail.com
on 9 Jul 2011 at 1:29
Original comment by morten.h...@gmail.com
on 9 Jul 2011 at 5:40
Original comment by morten.h...@gmail.com
on 9 Jul 2011 at 10:49
It seems a @Descriptor annotation may be of considerable use, mainly to provide
units of measure for attributes, e.g.
- Seconds, Milliseconds, Date etc.
That alone would save a lot of long attribute names such as "durationSeconds".
Original comment by morten.h...@gmail.com
on 9 Jul 2011 at 11:17
Original comment by morten.h...@gmail.com
on 10 Jul 2011 at 1:01
Created branches/devl-desvriptor to carry out the development of the descriptor
support.
Original comment by morten.h...@gmail.com
on 10 Jul 2011 at 5:36
Partial implementation committed to devl branch in r90, and
All @ManagedAttribute descriptor fields no modelled, including casting of
string values (minValue, maxValue, defaultValue, legalValues) to Integer/Long
for testing, but it seems that the jconsole totally ignores these values when
assigning values to a writable attribute (try running CountingApplication). It
shows all the Descriptor fields, but don't use them. Must try a JMX console
before proceeding to waste more developer time on Descriptors. Sad, really
Original comment by morten.h...@gmail.com
on 10 Jul 2011 at 8:42
I have the gut feeling, that if the Descriptor annotation makes any sense at
all, we should merge them into the @Description annotation (keeping the default
"value" being the textual description.
It seems wrong to have both @Description and @Descriptor annotations on the
same element. The only reason to keep both would be to stay close to the silly
legacy MBean design.
Probably, I should read up on the JSR 255 spec before making up my mind on this
one.
Yawn - "Dead Spec Walking" :-D
Original comment by morten.h...@gmail.com
on 10 Jul 2011 at 8:47
Original comment by morten.h...@gmail.com
on 13 Jul 2011 at 11:51
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
morten.h...@gmail.com
on 8 Jul 2011 at 6:08