Add first support for registering converter instances #933
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Thank you for opening a pull request and contributing to AsciidoctorJ!
Please take a bit of time giving some details about your pull request:
Kind of change
Description
What is the goal of this pull request?
The goal is to allow registering converter instances. Today it is only possible to register classes, that are instantiated by Asciidoctor for each document conversion.
How does it achieve that?
The ConverterProxy creates a single Ruby class for the class of the registered instance, and instantiates that on every registration call, passing the concrete Java converter to the initializeInstance method.
Are there any alternative ways to implement this?
Yes, similar to how the extensions work today, which is not ideal now that I have a different view on it, I could have created a new class for every registration, and each RubyClass would use the same registered Java instance.
But I think the new approach is a bit better.
Are there any implications of this pull request? Anything a user must know?
Issue
If this PR fixes an open issue, please add a line of the form:
Fixes #932
Release notes
Please add a corresponding entry to the file CHANGELOG.adoc
Note:
The PR is not final yet. There have to be a lot more tests, and there is still the problem how the ConverterRegistry should look like for looking up converters without breaking the API. Right now
JavaConverterRegistry.resolve()andJavaConverterRegistry.converters()return classes, not instances or objects.We might need to go to AsciidoctorJ 3.0.0 to support getting instances from the converter registry.
I already opened the PR early in case somebody wants to test this too.