New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[SCB-638] Config model mechanism #1087
Conversation
88b34b6
to
62c1e0b
Compare
62c1e0b
to
29d3fe0
Compare
|
||
@SuppressWarnings("unchecked") | ||
static <T> Property<T> getLongProperty(String propName, T defaultValue) { | ||
return (Property<T>) new DynamicLongProperty(propName, (Long) defaultValue); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe we can remove the annotation @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
like below?
static Property<Long> getLongProperty(String propName, Long defaultValue) {
return new DynamicLongProperty(propName, defaultValue);
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
done
// l1-1.a.l2-1.b | ||
// l1-2.a.l2-1.b | ||
// l1-1.a.l2-2.b | ||
// l1-2.a.l2-2.b |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It seems that the backward placeholders have a higher priority. Does this meets your expectation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it's my expectation, but it's not correct
i'll fix it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
done
29d3fe0
to
94b975c
Compare
support get config value by priority or inject priority value to model