Re: [Simple-support] Fwd: Constructor injection problems
Brought to you by:
niallg
Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Simple-support] Fwd: Constructor injection problems
|
From: Niall G. <gal...@ya...> - 2012-07-02 08:30:42
|
Maybe its me that is being unclear here, you never need anything other than the name= attribute for a constructor parameter. If you do then you have found a bug.
class X{@Element(required=false)String xX(@Element(name="x") String x){ this.x = x;}
}
The above will work without any issues.
Niall
--- On Fri, 29/6/12, Andrew Spinner <and...@ti...> wrote:
From: Andrew Spinner <and...@ti...>
Subject: [Simple-support] Fwd: Constructor injection problems
To:
Cc: sim...@li...
Received: Friday, 29 June, 2012, 2:47 PM
Hi Niall,
I think there may be a misunderstanding. I don't have to include required=true - that's working fine. I just have to include required=false on some elements, which I believe is the correct behaviour; it's just a little unclear in the documentation.
All seems to be working now.
Thanks,
Andrew
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Niall Gallagher <gal...@ya...> wrote:
I have many tests that are working without the need for required=true, have you got some classpath issue? If you are convinced its a problem can you send me on the code u use in a test case, id like to see this, you may have found a bug.
--- On Thu, 28/6/12, Andrew Spinner <and...@ti...> wrote:
From: Andrew Spinner <and...@ti...>
Subject: Re: [Simple-support] Constructor injection problems
To: sim...@li...
Received: Thursday, 28 June, 2012, 9:15 AM
Hi Niall,
That's strange, since I'm using Simple 2.6.4. (By the way, it's required=false, not required=true that I had to include.)
Thanks,
Andrew
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Niall Gallagher <gal...@ya...> wrote:
Hi Andrew,
This is only true for much older versions of Simple, for newer versions required=true would not be needed in the annotation.
Niall
--- On Wed, 27/6/12, Andrew Spinner <and...@ti...> wrote:
From: Andrew Spinner <and...@ti...>
Subject: Re: [Simple-support] Constructor injection problems
To:
Cc: sim...@li...
Received: Wednesday, 27 June, 2012, 12:21 PM
Hi Simon, Niall,
Thanks for your suggestions. I've tracked it down to null values being
passed to the constructor. Although my fields were annotated with
@Element(required = false), I hadn't realised that my constructor
arguments also had to be annotated with required=false, and this turned
out to be the problem. Perhaps this could be made clearer in the
documentation (although other people may not naturally make this error).
Thanks for your help!
Andrew
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Niall Gallagher <gal...@ya...> wrote:
Is your class an inner class, if so is it static? If it is inner and not static it can be be instantiated. If this is not the problem, send me a test case proving the problem, ill see what the problem is here.
On a side note, I really doubt there is a bug here, constructor injection has been very heavily tested in recent releases. Make sure u are using the most recent release.
--- On Mon, 25/6/12, Andrew Spinner <and...@ti...> wrote:
From: Andrew Spinner <and...@ti...>
Subject: [Simple-support] Constructor injection problems
To: sim...@li...
Received: Monday, 25 June, 2012, 9:27 AM
Hello, and thanks for this
lightweight framework,
I'm having some problems with constructor injection for my immutable class.
My instance variables are all final, and are all serialised by Simple. However, I don't need all the fields to be deserialised - some of the fields are derived, being based on mathematical calculations of the other fields. These derived variables are set in the constructor, based on the parameters passed to the constructor.
It doesn't make logical sense to pass values of these derived variables into the constructor, because they're not needed, and will be discarded. However, I've got to do so, or I'll get a ConstructorException, saying "no constructor accepts all read only values."
This isn't my production code, just an example:
public class calc
{
@Element(name="number")
private final int number;
@Element(name="numberSquared")
private final int numberSquared;
//extra constructor I have to provide
public Calc(@Element(name="number") int number, @Element(name="numberSquared") int numberSquared)
{
this(number); //ignores numberSquared parameter, letting chained constructor calculate value for itself
}
//usual constructor
Calc(int number)
{
this.number = number;
numberSquared = number * number; //ignoring parameter and calculating value for itself
}
Unfortunately, even when I create this extra constructor, I still get a PersistenceException: "Constructor not matched for class." As far as I can see, I've annotated the constructor correctly, providing a parameter for every possible field.
Short of me providing my actual code, is there anything I could look at that might fix it?
As a suggestion, it might be useful for PersistenceException to provided more specific information about how the constructor isn't matching.
Thanks,
Andrew
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Simple-support mailing list
Sim...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simple-support
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Simple-support mailing list
Sim...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simple-support
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Simple-support mailing list
Sim...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simple-support
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
Simple-support mailing list
Sim...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/simple-support
|
