Skip to content
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

Using DeserializationContext.handleWeirdStringValue for DateTimeException #66

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 5, 2018

Conversation

remal
Copy link
Contributor

@remal remal commented Apr 3, 2018

This is an example implementation for issue #65

@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member

First of all, thank you for submitting this PR -- it makes sense and is a good addition.
The only suggestion I have is that it would be great to have at least one new unit test to show how it is possible to now handle exception as intended, via handler.
(or if easy, more than one; but since implementations are similar, even just one helps a lot wrt regressions).

I'm happy to merge this, but first one (and only) process thing: we need to ask for a CLA before the first contribution to Jackson projects. Apologies if I missed one (we have a few contributors), but I don't think we have one from you yet.
Document is at:

https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson/blob/master/contributor-agreement.pdf

and it's one-pager. Usual way is to print, fill & sign it, scan, email to info at fasterxml dot com.
Once we have this I can merge the PR and CLA is valid for any and all contributions for Jackson project components.
Apologies for the extra step, looking forward to merging this!

@remal
Copy link
Contributor Author

remal commented Apr 4, 2018

@cowtowncoder
I've added some unit tests for LocalDateTIme deserialization. Please take a look.
Also I've sent signed CLA to the provided email.

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder merged commit f4ea3e3 into FasterXML:2.9 Apr 5, 2018
@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member

Looks good! Will make one small change wrt key deserializer -- needs to call handleWeirdKey() instead (since key handling differs a bit from value handling), but that's the only thing I'll change.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants