|
[hidden email] wrote:
> Author: jleroux > Date: Wed Jan 27 08:59:25 2010 > New Revision: 903571 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=903571&view=rev > Log: > After Adam's remark about formatting (actually mostly about Double instead of double), Sascha provided a new patch which was still not well formatted. So I decided to use the same formatting than in getPropertyValue. Even if it does not follow the "brackets around blocks rule" Sun convention. I have explained this a bit to Sascha at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3425 "Extend getPropertyNumber, Default Value" > > Modified: > ofbiz/trunk/framework/base/src/org/ofbiz/base/util/UtilProperties.java > > Modified: ofbiz/trunk/framework/base/src/org/ofbiz/base/util/UtilProperties.java > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/framework/base/src/org/ofbiz/base/util/UtilProperties.java?rev=903571&r1=903570&r2=903571&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- ofbiz/trunk/framework/base/src/org/ofbiz/base/util/UtilProperties.java (original) > +++ ofbiz/trunk/framework/base/src/org/ofbiz/base/util/UtilProperties.java Wed Jan 27 08:59:25 2010 > @@ -118,13 +118,13 @@ > return value; > } > > - public static double getPropertyNumber(String resource, String name, Double defaultValue) { > + public static double getPropertyNumber(String resource, String name, double defaultValue) { > double value = getPropertyNumber(resource, name); > - if(value == 0.00000){ > - return defaultValue; > - } > > - return value; > + if (value == 0.00000) > + return defaultValue; > + else > + return value; > } > > public static double getPropertyNumber(String resource, String name) { Actually, this is still broken. What happens if I put 0.00000 into the property file? Suddenly, the default will be returned. |
|
Adam Heath wrote:
> [hidden email] wrote: >> Author: jleroux >> Date: Wed Jan 27 08:59:25 2010 >> New Revision: 903571 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=903571&view=rev >> Log: >> After Adam's remark about formatting (actually mostly about Double instead of double), Sascha provided a new patch which was still not well formatted. So I decided to use the same formatting than in getPropertyValue. Even if it does not follow the "brackets around blocks rule" Sun convention. I have explained this a bit to Sascha at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3425 "Extend getPropertyNumber, Default Value" >> >> Modified: >> ofbiz/trunk/framework/base/src/org/ofbiz/base/util/UtilProperties.java >> >> Modified: ofbiz/trunk/framework/base/src/org/ofbiz/base/util/UtilProperties.java >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/ofbiz/trunk/framework/base/src/org/ofbiz/base/util/UtilProperties.java?rev=903571&r1=903570&r2=903571&view=diff >> ============================================================================== >> --- ofbiz/trunk/framework/base/src/org/ofbiz/base/util/UtilProperties.java (original) >> +++ ofbiz/trunk/framework/base/src/org/ofbiz/base/util/UtilProperties.java Wed Jan 27 08:59:25 2010 >> @@ -118,13 +118,13 @@ >> return value; >> } >> >> - public static double getPropertyNumber(String resource, String name, Double defaultValue) { >> + public static double getPropertyNumber(String resource, String name, double defaultValue) { >> double value = getPropertyNumber(resource, name); >> - if(value == 0.00000){ >> - return defaultValue; >> - } >> >> - return value; >> + if (value == 0.00000) >> + return defaultValue; >> + else >> + return value; >> } >> >> public static double getPropertyNumber(String resource, String name) { > > Actually, this is still broken. What happens if I put 0.00000 into > the property file? Suddenly, the default will be returned. It would also be helpful to give these methods more meaningful names, like getPropertyAsDouble. -Adrian |
|
Adrian Crum wrote:
> Adam Heath wrote: >> Actually, this is still broken. What happens if I put 0.00000 into >> the property file? Suddenly, the default will be returned. > > It would also be helpful to give these methods more meaningful names, > like getPropertyAsDouble. I agree, but have these methods existed in a release branch? If so, they need to be deprecated, kept around, and call into the newly named methods. |
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |
