Add support for skippable (de)serialization handlers #1238
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
bobvandevijver
force-pushed
the
configurable-handlers-v2
branch
from
6e9c51e to
e05d1d7
Compare
|
Thanks a lot! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I need to be able to choose between my handler and the default serializer implementation depending on the current deserialization depth, but I couldn't find any way to do so. Therefor, I added support for skippable handlers, by simply throwing a
SkipHandlerExceptionto do so.This PR is an updated version of #1236, created as separate PR to be able to illustrate the differences between both easily and to be able to choose which one is more suitable. I did not adjust the test method implementations at all compared to the first PR, only the implementation of the TestSubscriber used in the tests has been adjusted to match throw the required exception.
@goetas I hope this is what you meant with your comment, otherwise, please let me know!