The 2 postfix gives me flashbacks of Microsoft COM interfaces! :-p putObject is less shudder inducing than put2... for me at least.
Gary On Thu, Mar 25, 2021, 01:08 Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > Haha! > putObject? > > > > > On Mar 25, 2021, at 11:39, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > wrote: > > > > I’m sure that will drive Gary nuts. Let’s call the new method “put2()”. > > > > Ralph > > > >> On Mar 24, 2021, at 5:18 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Instead of overloading the existing method(s), how about adding new > methods > >> with a slightly different name that takes Object parameters? > >> > >>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 8:46 AM Carter Kozak <cko...@ckozak.net> > wrote: > >>> > >>> The method argument type changes are an ABI break, but I recall > extending > >>> MapMessage within a project in order to support more expressive types > -- > >>> that > >>> may have relied on dangerously casting the result of > >>> getIndexedReadOnlyStringMap > >>> to an IndexedStringMap. > >>> Including a safer Object-valued MapMessage subclass (with overloaded > put > >>> methods) > >>> sounds reasonable to me given at least two of us have run into this! > >>> > >>> -Carter > >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021, at 19:29, Remko Popma wrote: > >>>> I called it StringMap because the keys must be Strings. Admittedly > not a > >>>> great name. :-) > >>>> > >>>> Not sure exactly, but there may be cases where this change could > cause an > >>>> issue: > >>>> putAll(final Map<String, String> map) -> > >>>> putAll(final Map<String, Object> map) > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 2:12 AM Ralph Goers < > ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > >>> <mailto:ralph.goers%40dslextreme.com>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I looked the other day and wondered the same thing Volkan did. There > >>> are > >>>>> no unit tests and the contributor didn’t even indicate that he had > >>> tried > >>>>> it. > >>>>> > >>>>> I was initially concerned that the underlying Map wouldn’t support it > >>>>> since it has StringMap in its name. It turns out the values are > >>> objects. > >>>>> > >>>>> Technically I don’t think this would break compatibility. Any code > >>>>> referencing the put(String, String) would automatically map to > >>> put(String, > >>>>> Object). He didn’t modify the get method which would have broken > >>>>> compatibility. > >>>>> > >>>>> Ralph > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Mar 24, 2021, at 8:27 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com <mailto: > >>> boards%40gmail.com>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Pretty sure that would break binary compatibility since it removes > >>> the > >>>>>> String method. I think it might be addable but not removed like > that. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, 24 Mar 2021 at 02:39, Volkan Yazıcı < > volkan.yaz...@gmail.com > >>> <mailto:volkan.yazici%40gmail.com>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hello, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Adding non-String-typed value support to MapMessage was also > >>> something > >>>>> on > >>>>>>> my radar too. But this PR replacing String with Object in two lines > >>>>> seems > >>>>>>> too good to be true to me. Does anybody mind taking a second look > at > >>>>> this, > >>>>>>> please? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Kind regards. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message --------- > >>>>>>> From: Henry Widd <notificati...@github.com <mailto: > >>> notifications%40github.com>> > >>>>>>> Date: Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 4:58 PM > >>>>>>> Subject: [apache/logging-log4j2] MapMessage put methods should not > >>>>> mandate > >>>>>>> String values (#477) > >>>>>>> To: apache/logging-log4j2 <logging-log...@noreply.github.com > >>> <mailto:logging-log4j2%40noreply.github.com>> > >>>>>>> Cc: Subscribed <subscri...@noreply.github.com <mailto: > >>> subscribed%40noreply.github.com>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> the underlying Map is typed <String,Object> so the put methods on > >>>>>>> MapMessage can also be. > >>>>>>> ------------------------------ > >>>>>>> You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/477 > >>>>>>> Commit Summary > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - MapMessage put methods should not mandate String values > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> File Changes > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - *M* > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > log4j-api/src/main/java/org/apache/logging/log4j/message/MapMessage.java > >>>>>>> < > >>>>> > >>> > https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/477/files#diff-f03ffe9ceefd37c87fd118ce591bd8ad288e43b08cd663dde14441f4e7c117ef > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> (6) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Patch Links: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/477.patch > >>>>>>> - https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/477.diff > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> — > >>>>>>> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. > >>>>>>> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > >>>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/pull/477>, or > unsubscribe > >>>>>>> < > >>>>> > >>> > https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAARTSKGBRHC4NG637EHA4LTFC3BTANCNFSM4ZVO7L2Q > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> . > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > > > > >
