Re: [Simple-support] Creating a "short" serialization

[Niall G. <gal...@ya...>]

Hi,

Currently the only ways to use the session Map ar



--- Ben Wolfe <si...@be...> wrote:

> 
> Using @Persist and @Complete won't work for a few
> reasons.  We're using 
> a hibernate backend.  Modifications to the object
> will make it into the 
> database.  Adding calls to our 20+ pojos to clear
> out and refill the 
> object just isn't plausible.
> 
> The @Replace/@Resolve seems to be the best bet.  It
> doesn't effect the 
> root class -- which is what we want.  The only need
> would be to have it 
> act conditionally.  It looks like the @Replace
> method will take in a 
> "Map sessionData" object.  Is there a way I can add
> things to that map 
> when I create the Persister?  Or is the only way to
> modify that map by 
> doing so in the @Persist/@Complete/@Replace/@Resolve
> methods?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ben
> 
> Niall Gallagher wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Take a look at the following unit test.
> > 
> >
>
http://simple.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/simple/trunk/download/stream/src/test/java/org/simpleframework/xml/load/SubstituteTest.java
> > 
> > This shows the @Replace and @Resolve methods
> working.
> > The reason you could not get your test to run is
> > because the very root Class within the schema
> cannot
> > be replaced, only fields of a composite class. For
> > instance if the class schema you defined was a
> field
> > of some other class then it would replace fine.
> > 
> > With respect to you global property suggestion,
> why
> > not just use the session map to pass information
> > about, it will be passed to the @Persist and
> @Complete
> > annotated methods. For example:
> > 
> > @Persist
> > private void persistMe(Map session) {
> >    // use session here before serialization...
> > }
> > 
> > @Complete
> > private void completeMe(Map session) {
> >    // use the session here after serialization...
> > }
> > 
> > This is just one way, there are tonnes of other
> ways
> > this can be done.
> > 
> > Niall
> > 
> > --- Ben Wolfe <si...@be...> wrote:
> > 
> >> I can't seem to get the Replace method to work. 
> >> I've attached a test 
> >> method to demonstrate.  Perhaps you can show me
> what
> >> I'm doing wrong. :-/
> >>
> >> The @Replace/@Resolve methods have promise, but I
> >> still don't see a way 
> >> for the person serializing to trigger it.  The
> >> closest solution would be 
> >> if "someProperty" in your example below were
> >> actually a global property 
> >> set/retrieved via a call to a util class. 
> However,
> >> our code is running 
> >> on a server, and it is quite possible that
> multiple
> >> serializations will 
> >> be happening at the same time -- some "primary
> key
> >> only" and some full.
> >>
> >>  >public Object myResolveMethod() {
> >>  >   if(someProperty) {
> >>  >      return new SomeOtherObject(myProperty1,
> >> myProperty2);
> >>  >   }
> >>  >   return this; // Here I am saying don't read
> >> resolve
> >>  >}
> >>
> >> I have coded up the tags possibility.  I can
> submit
> >> a patch if you're 
> >> interested. :-)
> >>
> >> Ben
> >>
> >> Niall Gallagher wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Forgot to explain the following code snippit.
> This
> >>> demonstrates how an @Replace method could be
> used
> >>> instead of a @Resolve. The @Replace is used in
> >>> writing, it is similar to Java object
> >> serialization
> >>> writeReplace.
> >>>
> >>> @Root
> >>> public class SomeObject {
> >>>
> >>>    @Element(required=false)
> >>>    private String text;
> >>>    
> >>>    @Attribute(required=false)
> >>>    private int version;
> >>>
> >>>    @Attribute
> >>>    private String key;
> >>>
> >>>    public SomeObject() {
> >>>       super();
> >>>    }
> >>>
> >>>    public SomeObject(String key) {
> >>>       this.key = key;
> >>>    }
> >>>
> >>>    @Validate
> >>>    public void validate() {
> >>>       // do some validation here...
> >>>    }
> >>>
> >>>    @Replace
> >>>    private Object writeReplace() {
> >>>       return new SomeObject(key); // Here I
> >> provide
> >>> the same type with a subset of the properties
> >>>    }
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> You could also use the @Persist and @Complete,
> the
> >>> method annotated with @Persist is called just
> >> before
> >>> serialization of the object, and @Complete is
> >> called
> >>> directly after. So you can modify the contents
> of
> >> the
> >>> object before it is serialized and bring the
> >> object
> >>> back to a known state when you have finished
> >>> serializing it. So you get a chance to modify
> the
> >>> object for serialization, there is an example in
> >> the
> >>> tutorial.
> >>>
> >>> Niall
> >>>
> >>> --- Niall Gallagher <gal...@ya...>
> >> wrote:
> >>>> Hi, 
> >>>>
> >>>> This will give you both worlds. Why not do the
> >>>> following:
> >>>>
> >>>> public Object myResolveMethod() {
> >>>>    if(someProperty) {
> >>>>       return new SomeOtherObject(myProperty1,
> >>>> myProperty2);
> >>>>    }
> >>>>    return this; // Here I am saying don't read
> >>>> resolve
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> When you return "this" from the method
> annotated
> >>>> with
> >>>> @Resolve annotation you are saying not to
> resolve
> >> to
> >>>> something different. Also, you don't need to
> >> return
> >>>> a
> >>>> different type.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> @Root
> >>>> public class SomeObject {
> 
=== message truncated ===



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs