Skip to content

Comments

Support alternate radixes for numeric values#5445

Merged
cowtowncoder merged 22 commits intoFasterXML:3.xfrom
tiger9800:3.x-forked
Dec 22, 2025
Merged

Support alternate radixes for numeric values#5445
cowtowncoder merged 22 commits intoFasterXML:3.xfrom
tiger9800:3.x-forked

Conversation

@tiger9800
Copy link
Contributor

Add support for radices using the added to JsonFormat radix attribute in FasterXML/jackson-annotations#321. The initial work for the PR was done in issue #5317, and the original request was #221.

JsonFormat.Value v2 = null;
AnnotationIntrospector intr = config.getAnnotationIntrospector();
if (intr != null) {
AnnotatedMember member = getMember();
Copy link
Member

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder Dec 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why are we mixing in member annotations now -- this changes semantics of the method.

EDIT: never mind, that was done via findFormatOverrides() which does about same. But maybe call that method instead of inlining the logic?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done. Do not remember why I inlined in #5317

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.7% 📈 +0.0%
Branches branches 72.5% 📈 +0.0%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.7% 📈 +0.000%
Branches branches 72.5% 📈 +0.000%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.7% 📈 +0.000%
Branches branches 72.5% 📈 +0.000%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.7% 📈 +0.000%
Branches branches 72.5% 📈 +0.000%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.77% 📈 +0.000%
Branches branches 72.57% 📈 +0.040%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.77% 📈 +0.000%
Branches branches 72.55% 📈 +0.020%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.77% 📈 +0.000%
Branches branches 72.56% 📈 +0.030%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.78% 📈 +0.010%
Branches branches 72.57% 📈 +0.040%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.76% 📉 -0.010%
Branches branches 72.54% 📈 +0.010%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

1 similar comment
@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.76% 📉 -0.010%
Branches branches 72.54% 📈 +0.010%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.75% 📉 -0.020%
Branches branches 72.54% 📈 +0.020%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.76% 📉 -0.010%
Branches branches 72.55% 📈 +0.030%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

Copy link
Member

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.77% 📈 +0.000%
Branches branches 72.56% 📈 +0.040%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder added this to the 3.1.0 milestone Dec 21, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.76% 📉 -0.010%
Branches branches 72.54% 📈 +0.020%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member

@tiger9800 Phew! I think this is about ready for me to merge. Great job, I like how things evolved.

Will let this simmer until tomorrow and then hope to merge.

@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.76% 📉 -0.010%
Branches branches 72.55% 📈 +0.030%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder added the cla-received PR already covered by CLA (optional label) label Dec 22, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

🧪 Code Coverage Report

Metric Coverage Change
Instructions coverage 78.77% 📈 +0.000%
Branches branches 72.56% 📈 +0.030%

Coverage data generated from JaCoCo test results

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder merged commit 273dad9 into FasterXML:3.x Dec 22, 2025
6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

3.1 cla-received PR already covered by CLA (optional label)

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants