Changing asJValue signature for Record and MetaRecord

[Torsten Uhlmann]

Hi,

a while back I raised the issue that the asJValue methods of Record fields have an inconsistent signature (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/liftweb/kTBHlK7xBHM).

We discussed that and I changed them to return JValue (https://github.com/lift/framework/pull/1621).

In this course I also changed the signature of Record and MetaRecord to return JValue instead of JObject which turns out to be a mistake,

because now we can't call ~ anymore to join multiple records.

Are there any objections to changing the signature back to return JObject for Record and MetaRecord in the Lift 3 codebase?

Torsten.

[Antonio Salazar Cardozo]

It seems like the better approach would be to add `asJObject` and make `asJValue`

invoke it… Having `asJValue` return something that isn't strictly a `JValue` from the

consumer's perspective, and then using that on the caller side, seems a little weird.

At least that's what it looks like to me. What do others think?

Thanks,

Antonio

[Tim Nelson]

I understand the mismatch there in types may be a little unexpected, but I also think having a Record return anything other than a JObject doesn't make much sense either.

My preference would have been that this change was never made, but since we can't go back in time, I think adding an asJObject function is a good solution and works for me.

Would we able to get that in 3.0? Not sure it's technically a bug, but I'd hate to see 3.0 released the way it is.

Tim

[Torsten Uhlmann]

I can provide a PR in the coming days...

--
--
Lift, the simply functional web framework: http://liftweb.net
Code: http://github.com/lift
Discussion: http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb
Stuck? Help us help you: https://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/liftweb/Posting_example_code

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to liftweb+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Torsten Uhlmann]

Here's the PR: https://github.com/lift/framework/pull/1787

[Antonio Salazar Cardozo]

I'm down to have another RC built with this… Mostly because I haven't

had time to write a proper script to detect situations when LiftScreen templates

need to be migrated, and this is a perfectly fine thing to hide behind <_<

Thanks,

Antonio

[Peter Petersson]

+1 ;)

[Diego Medina]

+1 for having another RC so 3.0 final has this fix in

--

Diego Medina
Lift/Scala Consultant
di...@fmpwizard.com
http://blog.fmpwizard.com/