ByteArrayValueHandler should accept primitive byte array. Usage java functional interfaces

[kowalczm]

For optimization it would be good to add/refactor ByteArrayValueHandler for primitive byte arrays

[bytefish]

Thanks! Do you think existing code will continue to work... I mean, will Java Auto Box these values? I wonder if it is a breaking change to the handler and may affect people using it.

[kowalczm]

Hi,
Yes, it breaks contract but it is hard to imagine that some 'low level' development is relying on Byte objects instead of byte arrays. We could add this change as a new class but it would be good to register it in provider as a replacement of existing? In our case we had to 'wrap' all byte[] to Byte[]

[kowalczm]

I have added additional changes to use standard java interfaces

[bytefish]

@kowalczm I see. 😎 Please give me some time to review it.

[kowalczm]

Ok, looking forward release :)

[bytefish]

Yes. Your second commit changed a lot. Are these urgent changes, like you cannot proceed without them? I would rather make such changes with a new major revision to indicate breaking changes in the API, like adding generics to the mapping. I will think about what's best, but it can take until the weekend.

[kowalczm]

@bytefish, no problem. It's up to you

[bytefish]

I am now fixing the Unit Tests, Increase to Version 3.0 and then Release it to Maven! 👍

[bytefish]

All Tests passed, Releasing it to Maven! 👍

[kowalczm]

Thank you for merge and release

[bytefish]

Thank you for making the library better! 😎