Support for package-private jsonAdapter method about auto-value-moshi HOT 7 CLOSED

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017, 3:03 AM Ned Twigg ***@***.***> wrote: auto-value-moshi requires a method like this: public static JsonAdapter<MyAutoValueClass> jsonAdapter(Moshi moshi) { ... } Are you open to a PR which would allow this? static JsonAdapter<MyAutoValueClass> jsonAdapter(Moshi moshi) { ... } With Java 9 modularity coming, I'd like the option to use Moshi as an implementation detail which is invisible to client code. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#87>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEEEVEDY6C-hZIvAg7pEG5YZGz-Cv6Xks5rklVugaJpZM4MaI1N> .

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017, 6:06 AM Jake Wharton ***@***.***> wrote: That would require all your model objects be in the same package. Is that ok? Compilation would fail otherwise, which seems like reasonable behavior. On Sat, Mar 11, 2017, 3:03 AM Ned Twigg ***@***.***> wrote: > auto-value-moshi requires a method like this: > > public static JsonAdapter<MyAutoValueClass> jsonAdapter(Moshi moshi) { ... } > > Are you open to a PR which would allow this? > > static JsonAdapter<MyAutoValueClass> jsonAdapter(Moshi moshi) { ... } > > With Java 9 modularity coming, I'd like the option to use Moshi as an > implementation detail which is invisible to client code. > > — > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#87>, or mute the > thread > < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEEEVEDY6C-hZIvAg7pEG5YZGz-Cv6Xks5rklVugaJpZM4MaI1N > > . > — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#87 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABPJbi1rqZSVmpFaHp3EQYeNa2y2rnNFks5rko5AgaJpZM4MaI1N> .

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017, 8:13 AM Ryan Harter ***@***.***> wrote: That's only the case if you're using the MoshiAdapterFactory, right? If accessing the adapters manually or another way then they could be in different packages. On Sat, Mar 11, 2017, 6:06 AM Jake Wharton ***@***.***> wrote: > That would require all your model objects be in the same package. Is that > ok? Compilation would fail otherwise, which seems like reasonable behavior. > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017, 3:03 AM Ned Twigg ***@***.***> wrote: > > > auto-value-moshi requires a method like this: > > > > public static JsonAdapter<MyAutoValueClass> jsonAdapter(Moshi moshi) { > ... } > > > > Are you open to a PR which would allow this? > > > > static JsonAdapter<MyAutoValueClass> jsonAdapter(Moshi moshi) { ... } > > > > With Java 9 modularity coming, I'd like the option to use Moshi as an > > implementation detail which is invisible to client code. > > > > — > > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > <#87>, or mute the > > thread > > < > https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEEEVEDY6C-hZIvAg7pEG5YZGz-Cv6Xks5rklVugaJpZM4MaI1N > > > > . > > > > — > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > < #87 (comment) >, > or mute the thread > < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABPJbi1rqZSVmpFaHp3EQYeNa2y2rnNFks5rko5AgaJpZM4MaI1N > > . > — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#87 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEEEZsd3MI6WUgbeHGMo5KvWMldZqsyks5rkp4OgaJpZM4MaI1N> .

Yeah. I was thinking about models that referenced other models in other packages specifically. I still think it's reasonable to allow. On Sat, Mar 11, 2017, 8:13 AM Ryan Harter ***@***.***> wrote: > That's only the case if you're using the MoshiAdapterFactory, right? If > accessing the adapters manually or another way then they could be in > different packages. > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017, 6:06 AM Jake Wharton ***@***.***> > wrote: > > > That would require all your model objects be in the same package. Is that > > ok? Compilation would fail otherwise, which seems like reasonable > behavior. > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017, 3:03 AM Ned Twigg ***@***.***> > wrote: > > > > > auto-value-moshi requires a method like this: > > > > > > public static JsonAdapter<MyAutoValueClass> jsonAdapter(Moshi moshi) { > > ... } > > > > > > Are you open to a PR which would allow this? > > > > > > static JsonAdapter<MyAutoValueClass> jsonAdapter(Moshi moshi) { ... } > > > > > > With Java 9 modularity coming, I'd like the option to use Moshi as an > > > implementation detail which is invisible to client code. > > > > > > — > > > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > > <#87>, or mute the > > > thread > > > < > > > https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEEEVEDY6C-hZIvAg7pEG5YZGz-Cv6Xks5rklVugaJpZM4MaI1N > > > > > > . > > > > > > > — > > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > < > #87 (comment) > >, > > or mute the thread > > < > https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABPJbi1rqZSVmpFaHp3EQYeNa2y2rnNFks5rko5AgaJpZM4MaI1N > > > > . > > > > — > You are receiving this because you commented. > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > < #87 (comment) >, > or mute the thread > < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEEEZsd3MI6WUgbeHGMo5KvWMldZqsyks5rkp4OgaJpZM4MaI1N > > . > — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#87 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABPJblDg-hLDQgDL_zKF6zPhqgFeIw4eks5rkqVDgaJpZM4MaI1N> .