977 add digits rule

[john-tipper]

Fix to #977.

Implementation notes:

Requires use of a digits field that is associated with a property, which in turn requires integerDigits and fractionalDigits to be set within that digits field.

For example (this assumes that the config option of isUseBigDecimals() returns true).

{
    "type" : "object",
    "properties" : {
        "decimal" : {
            "type" : "number",
            "digits" : {
                "integerDigits": 5,
                "fractionalDigits": 10
            }
        }
    }
}

Validation of integerDigits and fractionalDigits is currently restricted to only checking that they exist. In the event that either does not, DigitsRule will throw an NoSuchElementException.

[joelittlejohn]

I like this addition, but the "digits" object seems unnecessary to me (an extra layer of nesting with no particular benefit). Can you just support integerDigits and fractionDigits at the property level?

[john-tipper]

Sure, no problem - how would you prefer to treat the 2 properties with respect to validation of their values? @digits requires both values, so if one is present but not another then throw?

…

Sent from my iPhone On 2 May 2019, at 13:39, Joe Littlejohn <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I like this addition, but the "digits" object seems unnecessary to me (an extra layer of nesting with no particular benefit). Can you just support integerDigits and fractionDigits at the property level? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#978 (comment)>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACKHSXQFGUR6PLVK35FO4TLPTLOI5ANCNFSM4HJ5ZWDQ>.

[joelittlejohn]

Yes, sounds good. They must both be omitted or both be included 👍

[john-tipper]

Updated PR to require 2 properties in order to introduce a @Digits constraint, as per @joelittlejohn's suggestion.
Failure mode in the event only one property is specified is to do nothing.