> On 22 Jan 2019, at 17:33, Colm O hEigeartaigh <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Please create a pull request and we will review it in more detail.
>
> Colm.
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:28 PM Matteo Rulli <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> We use JAX-RSSearch and Fiql parser in a JAX-RS endpoint and we have a
>> problem with org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.ext.search.Beanspector.
>>
>> Let's consider the following pojos:
>>
>> public class A {
>>
>> private String value;
>>
>> public String getValue(){ ... }
>> public void setValue(String value) { ... }
>> }
>>
>> public class B {
>>
>> private A aValue;
>>
>> public A getAValue(){ ... }
>> public void setAValue(A avalue) { ... }
>> }
>>
>> And assume one extends these pojos and decorates them with JPA
>> annotations.
>>
>> To leverage CXF org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.ext.search.SearchContext and
>> JPACriteriaQueryVisitor as explained in the docs (
>>
http://cxf.apache.org/docs/jax-rs-search.html#JAX-RSSearch-JPA2.0) and
>> perform searches like
>>
>> _s=aValue==*search token*
>>
>> in OpenJPA one has to override the EntityB.getAValue as follows:
>>
>> @Entity
>> // ... other JPA annotations are omitted
>> public class EntityB extends B {
>>
>> @Override
>> // We need to specialize return type to EntityA to make
>> SearchContext work
>> public EntityA getAValue(){ ... }
>>
>> // This method definition is needed to avoid java.lang.VerifyError
>> from JPA provider
>> public void setAValue(EntityA avalue) { ... }
>> }
>>
>> But with this scenario, the current implementation of
>> org.apache.cxf.jaxrs.ext.search.Beanspector<T> fails, throwing
>> IllegalArgumentException: Accessor 'aValue' type mismatch, getter type is X
>> while setter type is Y, X and Y depending on the order of the EntityB's
>> methods as returned by the Class.getMethods().
>>
>> This is the current implementation of Beanspector where the exception is
>> triggered:
>>
>> @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
>> private void init() {
>> if (tclass == null) {
>> tclass = (Class<T>)tobj.getClass();
>> }
>> for (Method m : tclass.getMethods()) {
>> if (isGetter(m)) {
>> getters.put(getPropertyName(m), m);
>> } else if (isSetter(m)) {
>> setters.put(getPropertyName(m), m);
>> }
>> }
>> // check type equality for getter-setter pairs
>> Set<String> pairs = new HashSet<>(getters.keySet());
>> pairs.retainAll(setters.keySet());
>> for (String accessor : pairs) {
>> Class<?> getterClass = getters.get(accessor).getReturnType();
>> Class<?> setterClass =
>> setters.get(accessor).getParameterTypes()[0];
>> if (!getterClass.equals(setterClass)) {
>> throw new IllegalArgumentException(String
>> .format("Accessor '%s' type mismatch, getter type is %s
>> while setter type is %s",
>> accessor, getterClass.getName(),
>> setterClass.getName()));
>> }
>> }
>> }
>>
>> And this is how we patched it:
>>
>> @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
>> private void init() {
>> if (tclass == null) {
>> tclass = (Class<T>)tobj.getClass();
>> }
>> for (Method m : tclass.getMethods()) {
>> if (isGetter(m)) {
>> String pname = getPropertyName(m);
>> if (!getters.containsKey(pname)) {
>> getters.put(getPropertyName(m), m);
>> } else {
>> // Prefer the getter that has the most specialized
>> class as a return type
>> Method _m = getters.get(pname);
>> if
>> (_m.getReturnType().isAssignableFrom(m.getReturnType())) {
>> getters.put(pname, m);
>> }
>> }
>> } else if (isSetter(m)) {
>> String pname = getPropertyName(m);
>> if (!setters.containsKey(pname)) {
>> setters.put(getPropertyName(m), m);
>> } else {
>> // Prefer the setter that has the most specialized
>> class as a parameter
>> Method _m = setters.get(pname);
>> if
>> (_m.getParameterTypes()[0].isAssignableFrom(m.getParameterTypes()[0])) {
>> setters.put(pname, m);
>> }
>> }
>> }
>> }
>> // check type equality for getter-setter pairs
>> Set<String> pairs = new HashSet<>(getters.keySet());
>> pairs.retainAll(setters.keySet());
>> for (String accessor : pairs) {
>> Class<?> getterClass = getters.get(accessor).getReturnType();
>> Class<?> setterClass =
>> setters.get(accessor).getParameterTypes()[0];
>> if (!setterClass.isAssignableFrom(getterClass)) {
>> throw new IllegalArgumentException(String
>> .format("Accessor '%s' type mismatch, getter type is %s
>> while setter type is %s",
>> accessor, getterClass.getName(),
>> setterClass.getName()));
>> }
>> }
>> }
>>
>> If you think this is OK we can create a pull request with this.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Matteo
>
>
>
> --
> Colm O hEigeartaigh
>
> Talend Community Coder
>
http://coders.talend.com
Locked
