I am trying to use Jersey declarative hyperlinking and JAXB to achieve something that seems fairly simple to me, but despite reading all the docs and examples I could find I can't get things to work.
I have a bookstore with books, each of which has just a title.
I would like GET /bookstore to return just an array of hyperlinks to books,
while GET /bookstore/some-title would return the actual serialized book attributes.
I am getting completely confused with resources and "representations", and with the way #Ref is supposed to work. What would be the cleanest way to design this?
The icing on the cake would be the ability to get either versions of the bookstore collection (shallow with just book URIs or deep with actual book attributes) based on a query parameter...
I have tried to add this method to bookstore:
#XmlElement
public BookRef[] getBookReferences()
{
BookRef[] refs = new BookRef[_books.size()];
for (int i = 0; i < refs.length; i++) {
refs[i] = new BookRef(_books.get(i).getTitle());
}
return refs;
}
with this BookRef class:
#XmlRootElement(name="book")
public class BookRef
{
private String _title;
public BookRef()
{
}
public BookRef(#PathParam("title") String title)
{
_title= title;
}
#Ref(resource=Book.class,
style = Ref.Style.ABSOLUTE,
bindings=#Binding(title="title", value="${instance.title}")
)
private URI _self;
#XmlElement
public URI getURI()
{
return _self;
}
}
... but that just yields (in JSON): {"bookReferences":null}
Related
I'm struggling since a couple of hours trying to get MapStruct generate a valid mapper for JAXB generated classes. The particularity of these classes is that they don't have neither setters nor adders for collections. For example:
#XmlAccessorType(XmlAccessType.FIELD)
#XmlType(name = "IndividualType", propOrder = {"addressTypes","pensionTypes"})
public class IndividualType
{
...
#XmlElement(name = "addressType")
protected List<AddressType> addressTypes;
#XmlAttribute(name = "firstName", required = true)
protected String firstName;
...
public List<AddressType> getAddressTypes()
{
if (addressTypes == null) {
addressTypes = new ArrayList<AddressType>();
}
return this.addressTypes;
}
public String getFirstName()
{
return firstName;
}
public void setFirstName(String value)
{
this.firstName = value;
}
...
}
The class avove have a getter and a setter for attributes (firstName in this example) but for collections (List here) it only has a getter. Hence it's the consumer responsibility to access via getAddressTypes(add (new AddressType(...)).
The MapStruct mapper for such a class is as follows:
#Mapper(collectionMappingStrategy = CollectionMappingStrategy.TARGET_IMMUTABLE, uses = {AddressTypeMapper.class}, unmappedTargetPolicy = ReportingPolicy.IGNORE, componentModel = "spring")
public interface IndividualTypeMapper
{
IndividualType toIndividualType(IndividualEntity individual);
#InheritInverseConfiguration
IndividualEntity fromIndividualType(IndividualType individualType);
}
And the MapStruct generated code is:
#Override
public IndividualEntity fromIndividualType(IndividualType individualType)
{
if ( individualType == null )
return null;
IndividualEntity individualEntity = new IndividualEntity();
individualEntity.setFirstName( individualType.getFirstName() );
...
return individualEntity;
}
In the generated code above, only the properties having a setter get initialized despite the usage of the TARGET_IMMUTABLE strategy.
Any suggestions please ? Of course, a simple constructor would perfectly do but, for some reason, people seems to prefer complicated and nonworking solutions to simple working ones and, consequently, I have to use MapStruct :-(
Many thanks in advance.
Marie-France
The reason why it is not working is due to the fact that you are using CollectionMappingStrategy.TARGET_IMMUTABLE. With that you are basically telling MapStruct my collection targets are immutable and will throw an exception if you try to modify the collection returned by the getter.
I would suggest removing the collectionMappingStrategy and see whether it works without it.
So I have recently migrated to v6 and I will try to simplify my question
I have the following class
#AllArgsConstructor
public class Songs {
String title;
List<String> genres;
}
In my scenario I want to have something like:
Then The results are as follows:
|title |genre |
|happy song |romance, happy|
And the implementation should be something like:
#Then("Then The results are as follows:")
public void theResultsAreAsFollows(Songs song) {
//Some code here
}
I have the default transformer
#DefaultParameterTransformer
#DefaultDataTableEntryTransformer(replaceWithEmptyString = "[blank]")
#DefaultDataTableCellTransformer
public Object transformer(Object fromValue, Type toValueType) {
ObjectMapper objectMapper = new ObjectMapper();
return objectMapper.convertValue(fromValue, objectMapper.constructType(toValueType));
}
My current issue is that I get the following error: Cannot construct instance of java.util.ArrayList (although at least one Creator exists)
How can I tell cucumber to interpret specific cells as lists? but keeping all in the same step not splitting apart? Or better how can I send an object in a steps containing different variable types such as List, HashSet, etc.
If I do a change and replace the list with a String everything is working as expected
#M.P.Korstanje thank you for your idea. If anyone is trying to find a solution for this here is the way I did it as per suggestions received. Inspected to see the type fromValue has and and updated the transform method into something like:
if (fromValue instanceof LinkedHashMap) {
Map<String, Object> map = (LinkedHashMap<String, Object>) fromValue;
Set<String> keys = map.keySet();
for (String key : keys) {
if (key.equals("genres")) {
List<String> genres = Arrays.asList(map.get(key).toString().split(",", -1));
map.put("genres", genres);
}
return objectMapper.convertValue(map, objectMapper.constructType(toValueType));
}
}
It is somehow quite specific but could not find a better solution :)
Core Question:
I have a generic interface IValidatingAttribute<T>, which creates the contract bool IsValid(T value); The interface is implemented by a variety of Attributes, which all serve the purpose of determining if the current value of said Field or Property they decorate is valid per the interface spec that I'm dealing with. What I want to do is create a single validation method that will scan every field and property of the given model, and if that field or property has any attributes that implement IValidatingAttribute<T>, it should validate the value against each of those attributes. So, using reflection I have the sets of fields and properties, and within those sets I can get the list of attributes. How can I determine which attributes implement IValidatingAttribute and then call IsValid(T value)?
background:
I am working on a library project that will be used to develop a range of later projects against the interface for a common third party system. (BL Server, for those interested)
BL Server has a wide range of fairly arcane command structures that have varying validation requirements per command and parameter, and then it costs per transaction to call these commands, so one of the library requirements is to easily define the valdiation requirements at the model level to catch invalid commands before they are sent. It is also intended to aid in the development of later projects by allowing developers to catch invalid models without needing to set up the BL server connections.
Current Attempt:
Here's where I've gotten so far (IsValid is an extension method):
public interface IValidatingAttribute<T>
{
bool IsValid(T value);
}
public static bool IsValid<TObject>(this TObject sourceObject) where TObject : class, new()
{
var properties = typeof(TObject).GetProperties();
foreach (var prop in properties)
{
var attributeData = prop.GetCustomAttributesData();
foreach (var attribute in attributeData)
{
var attrType = attribute.AttributeType;
var interfaces = attrType.GetInterfaces().Where(inf => inf.IsGenericType).ToList();
if (interfaces.Any(infc => infc.Equals(typeof(IValidatingAttribute<>))))
{
var value = prop.GetValue(sourceObject);
//At this point, I know that the current attribute implements 'IValidatingAttribute<>', but I don't know what T is in that implementation.
//Also, I don't know what data type 'value' is, as it's currently boxed as an object.
//The underlying type to value will match the expected T in IValidatingAttribute.
//What I need is something like the line below:
if (!(attribute as IValidatingAttribute<T>).IsValid(value as T)) //I know this condition doesn't work, but it's what I'm trying to do.
{
return false;
}
}
}
return true;
}
}
Example usage:
Just to better explain what I am trying to achieve:
public class SomeBLRequestObject
{
/// <summary>
/// Required, only allows exactly 2 alpha characters.
/// </summary>
[MinCharacterCount(2), MaxCharacterCount(2), IsRequired, AllowedCharacterSet(CharSets.Alpha))]
public string StateCode {get; set;}
}
And then, later on in code:
...
var someBLObj = SomeBLRequestObjectFactory.Create();
if(!someBLObj.IsValid())
{
throw new InvalidObjectException("someBLObj is invalid!");
}
Thank you, I'm really looking for a solution to the problem as it stands, but I'm more than willing to listen if somebody has a viable alternative approach.
I'm trying to go generic extension method with this because there are literally hundreds of the BL Server objects, and I'm going with attributes because each of these objects can have upper double digit numbers of properties, and it's going to make things much, much easier if the requirements for each object are backed in and nice and readable for the next developer to have to use this thing.
Edit
Forgot to mention : This Question is the closest I've found, but what I really need are the contents of \\Do Something in TcKs's answer.
Well, after about 6 hours and a goods nights sleep, I realized that I was over-complicating this thing. Solved it with the following (ExtValidationInfo is the class that the below two extensions are in.):
Jon Skeet's answer over here pointed me at a better approach, although it still smells a bit, this one at least works.
public static bool IsValid<TObject>(this TObject sourceObject) where TObject : class, new()
{
var baseValidationMethod = typeof(ExtValidationInfo).GetMethod("ValidateProperty", BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.Public);
var properties = TypeDataHandler<TObject>.Properties;
foreach (var prop in properties)
{
var attributes = prop.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(IValidatingAttribute<>)).ToList();
if (!attributes.Any())
{
continue; // No validators, skip.
}
var propType = prop.PropertyType;
var validationMethod = baseValidationMethod.MakeGenericMethod(propType);
var propIsValid = validationMethod.Invoke(null, prop.GetValue(sourceObject), attributes);
if(!propIsValid)
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
public static bool ValidateProperty<TPropType>(TPropType value, List<IValidatingAttribute<TPropType>> validators)
{
foreach (var validator in validators)
{
if (!validator.IsValid(value))
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
What is the best approach to bind US State in WPF (in ListBox or in DropDownList)? Should I use DataTable to bind this data? Is binding DataTable to WPF object right programming approach? Or Should I use class/object. I mean get data from database and convert it to Generic Object List and then bind this list to WPF object?
Thanks,
public class States
{
private string name;
public string Name
{
get
{
return name;
}
}
private string id;
public string Id
{
get
{
return id;
}
}
}
List<States> states = new List<States>();
//get from database
foreach( states DataSource)
{
name = "Alabama";
id = "1";
}
// next Cache list of states for better performance
Many ways...
One approach is to use a list class. get from data source, next cache for better performance.
I'm struggling with implementing a factory object. Here's the context :
I've in a project a custom store. In order to read/write records, I've written this code in a POCO model/separated repository:
public class Id { /* skip for clarity*/} // My custom ID representation
public interface IId
{
Id Id { get; set; }
}
public interface IGenericRepository<T> where T : IId
{
T Get(Id objectID);
void Save(T #object);
}
public interface IContext
{
TRepository GetRepository<T, TRepository>()
where TRepository : IGenericRepository<T>
where T:IId;
IGenericRepository<T> GetRepository<T>()
where T:IId;
}
My IContext interface defines two kind of repositories.
The former is for standard objects with only get/save methods, the later allows me to define specifics methods for specific kind of objects. For example :
public interface IWebServiceLogRepository : IGenericRepository<WebServiceLog>
{
ICollection<WebServiceLog> GetOpenLogs(Id objectID);
}
And it the consuming code I can do one of this :
MyContext.GetRepository<Customer>().Get(myID); --> standard get
MyContext.GetRepository<WebServiceLog, IWebServiceLogRepository>().GetOpenLogs(myID); --> specific operation
Because most of objects repository are limited to get and save operations, I've written a generic repository :
public class BaseRepository<T> : IGenericRepository<T>
where T : IId, new()
{
public virtual T Get(Id objectID){ /* provider specific */ }
public void Save(T #object) { /* provider specific */ }
}
and, for custom ones, I simply inherits the base repository :
internal class WebServiceLogRepository: BaseRepository<WebServiceLog>, IWebServiceLogRepository
{
public ICollection<WebServiceLog> GetByOpenLogsByRecordID(Id objectID)
{
/* provider specific */
}
}
Everything above is ok (at least I think it's ok). I'm now struggling to implement the MyContext class. I'm using MEF in my project for other purposes. But because MEF doesn't support (yet) generic exports, I did not find a way to reach my goal.
My context class is looking like by now :
[Export(typeof(IContext))]
public class UpdateContext : IContext
{
private System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<Type, object> m_Implementations;
public UpdateContext()
{
m_Implementations = new System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<Type, object>();
}
public TRepository GetRepository<T, TRepository>()
where T : IId
where TRepository : IGenericRepository<T>
{
var tType = typeof(T);
if (!m_Implementations.ContainsKey(tType))
{
/* this code is neither working nor elegant for me */
var resultType = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies().SelectMany(
(a) => a.GetTypes()
).Where((t)=>t.GetInterfaces().Contains(typeof(TRepository))).Single();
var result = (TRepository)resultType.InvokeMember("new", System.Reflection.BindingFlags.CreateInstance, null, null, new object[] { this });
m_Implementations.Add(tType, result);
}
return (TRepository)m_Implementations[tType];
}
public IGenericRepository<T> GetRepository<T>() where T : IId
{
return GetRepository<T, IGenericRepository<T>>();
}
}
I'd appreciate a bit of help to unpuzzle my mind with this quite common scenario
Not sure if I've understood you correctly, but I think you're perhaps over complicating things. To begin with, make sure you've designed your code independent of any factory or Dependency Injection framework or composition framework.
For starters lets look at what you want your calling code to look like, this is what you said:
MyContext.GetRepository<Customer>().Get(myID); --> standard get
MyContext.GetRepository<WebServiceLog, IWebServiceLogRepository>().GetOpenLogs(myID);
You don't have to agree with my naming choices below, but it indicates what I undertand from your code, you can tell me if I'm wrong. Now, I feel like the calling would be simpler like this:
RepositoryFactory.New<IRepository<Customer>>().Get(myId);
RepositoryFactory.New<IWebServiceLogRepository>().GetOpenLogs(myId);
Line 1:
Because the type here is IRepository it's clear what the return type is, and what the T type is for the base IRepository.
Line 2:
The return type here from the factory is IWebServiceLogRepository. Here you don'y need to specify the entity type, your interface logically already implements IRepository. There's no need to specify this again.
So your interface for these would look like this:
public interface IRepository<T>
{
T Get(object Id);
T Save(T object);
}
public interface IWebServiceLogRepository: IRepository<WebServiceLog>
{
List<WebServiceLog> GetOpenLogs(object Id);
}
Now I think the implementations and factory code for this would be simpler as the factory only has to know about a single type. On line 1 the type is IRepository, and in line 2, IWebServiceLogRepository.
Try that, and try rewriting your code to simply find classes that implement those types and instantiating them.
Lastly, in terms of MEF, you could carry on using that, but Castle Windsor would really make things much simpler for you, as it lets you concentrate on your architecture and code design, and its very very simple to use. You only ever reference Castle in your app startup code. The rest of your code is simply designed using the Dependency Injection pattern, which is framework agnostic.
If some of this isn't clear, let me know if you'd like me to update this answer with the implementation code of your repositories too.
UPDATE
and here's the code which resolves the implementations. You were making it a bit harder for yourself by not using the Activator class.
If you use Activator and use only one Generic parameter as I've done in the method below, you should be ok. Note the code's a bit rough but you get the idea:
public static T GetThing<T>()
{
List<Type> assemblyTypes = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()
.SelectMany(s => s.GetTypes()).ToList();
Type interfaceType = typeof(T);
if(interfaceType.IsGenericType)
{
var gens = interfaceType.GetGenericArguments();
List<Type> narrowed = assemblyTypes.Where(p => p.IsGenericType && !p.IsInterface).ToList();
var implementations = new List<Type>();
narrowed.ForEach(t=>
{
try
{
var imp = t.MakeGenericType(gens);
if(interfaceType.IsAssignableFrom(imp))
{
implementations.Add(imp);
}
}catch
{
}
});
return (T)Activator.CreateInstance(implementations.First());
}
else
{
List<Type> implementations = assemblyTypes.Where(p => interfaceType.IsAssignableFrom(p) && !p.IsInterface).ToList();
return (T)Activator.CreateInstance(implementations.First());
}
}