Skip to content

Support alternate radixes for numeric values #5445

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
tiger9800 wants to merge 20 commits into
base: 3.x
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Support alternate radixes for numeric values #5445

tiger9800 wants to merge 20 commits into from
+579 −35

Conversation

@tiger9800
Copy link
Contributor

@tiger9800 tiger9800 commented Nov 29, 2025

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.

cowtowncoder
cowtowncoder reviewed Dec 4, 2025
View reviewed changes
src/main/java/tools/jackson/databind/introspect/ConcreteBeanPropertyBase.java Outdated
JsonFormat.Value v2 = null;
AnnotationIntrospector intr = config.getAnnotationIntrospector();
if (intr != null) {
AnnotatedMember member = getMember();
Copy link
Member

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder Dec 4, 2025 •
edited
Loading

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

@tiger9800 tiger9800 Dec 4, 2025

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

github-actions bot commented Dec 12, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 12, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 12, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 12, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 21, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 21, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 21, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 21, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 21, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 21, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 21, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 21, 2025

🧪 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 approved these changes Dec 21, 2025
View reviewed changes
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

github-actions bot commented Dec 21, 2025

🧪 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

github-actions bot commented Dec 21, 2025

🧪 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

cowtowncoder commented Dec 21, 2025

@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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder cowtowncoder approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

3.1

Projects

None yet

Milestone

3.1.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@tiger9800 @cowtowncoder