I am trying to clean and refactor my service code which currently looks like this-
public void generateBalance(Receipt receipt) {
if (receipt.getType().equals(X) && receipt.getRegion.equals(EMEA)) {
// do something to the receipt that's passed
} else if (receiptType.equals(Y)) {
// do something to the receipt
} else if (receipt.getRegion.equals(APAC) {
// call an external API and update the receipt
}....
...
// finally
dataStore.save(receipt);
Basically there's a bunch of conditionals that are in this main service which look for certain fields in the object that is being passed. Either it's the type or the region.
I was looking to use this design pattern- https://www.refactoring.com/catalog/replaceConditionalWithPolymorphism.html
However, I am not sure how this would work for a service class. Currently my REST handler calls this particular service. Also how can I do polymorphism for both the "receiptType" and "region"?
Is there a way I can just do all the updates to the receipt once in different services, then finally save the receipt at one location? (maybe a base class?) I am really confused on how to start. TIA!
If your classes should have the same behaviour, then it becomes pretty simple to use polymorpism. The pattern is called as Strategy. Let me show an example.
At first we need to use enum. If you do not have enum, then you can create a method which will return enum value based on your conditions:
if (receipt.getType().equals(X) && receipt.getRegion.equals(EMEA)) // other
// code is omitted for the brevity
So enum will look like this:
public enum ReceiptType
{
Emea, Y, Apac
}
Then we need an abstract class which will describe behaviour for derived classes:
public abstract class ActionReceipt
{
public abstract string Do();
}
And our derived classes will look this:
public class ActionReceiptEmea : ActionReceipt
{
public override string Do()
{
return "I am Emea";
}
}
public class ActionReceiptY : ActionReceipt
{
public override string Do()
{
return "I am Y";
}
}
public class ActionReceiptApac : ActionReceipt
{
public override string Do()
{
return "I am Apac";
}
}
Moreover, we need a factory which will create derived classes based on enum. So we can use Factory pattern with a slight modification:
public class ActionReceiptFactory
{
private Dictionary<ReceiptType, ActionReceipt> _actionReceiptByType =
new Dictionary<ReceiptType, ActionReceipt>
{
{
ReceiptType.Apac, new ActionReceiptApac()
},
{
ReceiptType.Emea, new ActionReceiptEmea()
},
{
ReceiptType.Y, new ActionReceiptY()
}
};
public ActionReceipt GetInstanceByReceiptType(ReceiptType receiptType) =>
_actionReceiptByType[receiptType];
}
And then polymorpism in action will look like this:
void DoSomething(ReceiptType receiptType)
{
ActionReceiptFactory actionReceiptFactory = new ActionReceiptFactory();
ActionReceipt receipt =
actionReceiptFactory.GetInstanceByReceiptType(receiptType);
string someDoing = receipt.Do(); // Output: "I am Emea"
}
UPDATE:
You can create some helper method which will return enum value based on
your logic of region and receiptType:
public class ReceiptTypeHelper
{
public ReceiptType Get(ActionReceipt actionReceipt)
{
if (actionReceipt.GetType().Equals("Emea"))
return ReceiptType.Emea;
else if (actionReceipt.GetType().Equals("Y"))
return ReceiptType.Y;
return ReceiptType.Apac;
}
}
and you can call it like this:
void DoSomething()
{
ReceiptTypeHelper receiptTypeHelper = new ReceiptTypeHelper();
ReceiptType receiptType = receiptTypeHelper
.Get(new ActionReceiptEmea());
ActionReceiptFactory actionReceiptFactory = new
ActionReceiptFactory();
ActionReceipt receipt =
actionReceiptFactory.GetInstanceByReceiptType(receiptType);
string someDoing = receipt.Do(); // Output: "I am Emea"
}
This might be a duplicate. But I cannot find a solution to my Problem.
I have a class
public class MyResponse implements Serializable {
private boolean isSuccess;
public boolean isSuccess() {
return isSuccess;
}
public void setSuccess(boolean isSuccess) {
this.isSuccess = isSuccess;
}
}
Getters and setters are generated by Eclipse.
In another class, I set the value to true, and write it as a JSON string.
System.out.println(new ObjectMapper().writeValueAsString(myResponse));
In JSON, the key is coming as {"success": true}.
I want the key as isSuccess itself. Is Jackson using the setter method while serializing? How do I make the key the field name itself?
This is a slightly late answer, but may be useful for anyone else coming to this page.
A simple solution to changing the name that Jackson will use for when serializing to JSON is to use the #JsonProperty annotation, so your example would become:
public class MyResponse implements Serializable {
private boolean isSuccess;
#JsonProperty(value="isSuccess")
public boolean isSuccess() {
return isSuccess;
}
public void setSuccess(boolean isSuccess) {
this.isSuccess = isSuccess;
}
}
This would then be serialised to JSON as {"isSuccess":true}, but has the advantage of not having to modify your getter method name.
Note that in this case you could also write the annotation as #JsonProperty("isSuccess") as it only has the single value element
I recently ran into this issue and this is what I found. Jackson will inspect any class that you pass to it for getters and setters, and use those methods for serialization and deserialization. What follows "get", "is" and "set" in those methods will be used as the key for the JSON field ("isValid" for getIsValid and setIsValid).
public class JacksonExample {
private boolean isValid = false;
public boolean getIsValid() {
return isValid;
}
public void setIsValid(boolean isValid) {
this.isValid = isValid;
}
}
Similarly "isSuccess" will become "success", unless renamed to "isIsSuccess" or "getIsSuccess"
Read more here: http://www.citrine.io/blog/2015/5/20/jackson-json-processor
Using both annotations below, forces the output JSON to include is_xxx:
#get:JsonProperty("is_something")
#param:JsonProperty("is_something")
When you are using Kotlin and data classes:
data class Dto(
#get:JsonProperty("isSuccess") val isSuccess: Boolean
)
You might need to add #param:JsonProperty("isSuccess") if you are going to deserialize JSON as well.
EDIT: If you are using swagger-annotations to generate documentation, the property will be marked as readOnly when using #get:JsonProperty. In order to solve this, you can do:
#JsonAutoDetect(isGetterVisibility = JsonAutoDetect.Visibility.NONE)
data class Dto(
#field:JsonProperty(value = "isSuccess") val isSuccess: Boolean
)
You can configure your ObjectMapper as follows:
mapper.setPropertyNamingStrategy(new PropertyNamingStrategy() {
#Override
public String nameForGetterMethod(MapperConfig<?> config, AnnotatedMethod method, String defaultName)
{
if(method.hasReturnType() && (method.getRawReturnType() == Boolean.class || method.getRawReturnType() == boolean.class)
&& method.getName().startsWith("is")) {
return method.getName();
}
return super.nameForGetterMethod(config, method, defaultName);
}
});
I didn't want to mess with some custom naming strategies, nor re-creating some accessors.
The less code, the happier I am.
This did the trick for us :
import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonIgnoreProperties;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonProperty;
#JsonIgnoreProperties({"success", "deleted"}) // <- Prevents serialization duplicates
public class MyResponse {
private String id;
private #JsonProperty("isSuccess") boolean isSuccess; // <- Forces field name
private #JsonProperty("isDeleted") boolean isDeleted;
}
Building upon Utkarsh's answer..
Getter names minus get/is is used as the JSON name.
public class Example{
private String radcliffe;
public getHarryPotter(){
return radcliffe;
}
}
is stored as { "harryPotter" : "whateverYouGaveHere" }
For Deserialization, Jackson checks against both the setter and the field name.
For the Json String { "word1" : "example" }, both the below are valid.
public class Example{
private String word1;
public setword2( String pqr){
this.word1 = pqr;
}
}
public class Example2{
private String word2;
public setWord1(String pqr){
this.word2 = pqr ;
}
}
A more interesting question is which order Jackson considers for deserialization. If i try to deserialize { "word1" : "myName" } with
public class Example3{
private String word1;
private String word2;
public setWord1( String parameter){
this.word2 = parameter ;
}
}
I did not test the above case, but it would be interesting to see the values of word1 & word2 ...
Note: I used drastically different names to emphasize which fields are required to be same.
You can change primitive boolean to java.lang.Boolean (+ use #JsonPropery)
#JsonProperty("isA")
private Boolean isA = false;
public Boolean getA() {
return this.isA;
}
public void setA(Boolean a) {
this.isA = a;
}
Worked excellent for me.
If you are interested in handling 3rd party classes not under your control (like #edmundpie mentioned in a comment) then you add Mixin classes to your ObjectMapper where the property/field names should match the ones from your 3rd party class:
public class MyStack32270422 {
public static void main(String[] args) {
ObjectMapper om3rdParty = new ObjectMapper();
om3rdParty .addMixIn(My3rdPartyResponse.class, MixinMyResponse.class);
// add further mixins if required
String jsonString = om3rdParty.writeValueAsString(new My3rdPartyResponse());
System.out.println(jsonString);
}
}
class MixinMyResponse {
// add all jackson annotations here you want to be used when handling My3rdPartyResponse classes
#JsonProperty("isSuccess")
private boolean isSuccess;
}
class My3rdPartyResponse{
private boolean isSuccess = true;
// getter and setter here if desired
}
Basically you add all your Jackson annotations to your Mixin classes as if you would own the class. In my opinion quite a nice solution as you don't have to mess around with checking method names starting with "is.." and so on.
there is another method for this problem.
just define a new sub-class extends PropertyNamingStrategy and pass it to ObjectMapper instance.
here is a code snippet may be help more:
mapper.setPropertyNamingStrategy(new PropertyNamingStrategy() {
#Override
public String nameForGetterMethod(MapperConfig<?> config, AnnotatedMethod method, String defaultName) {
String input = defaultName;
if(method.getName().startsWith("is")){
input = method.getName();
}
//copy from LowerCaseWithUnderscoresStrategy
if (input == null) return input; // garbage in, garbage out
int length = input.length();
StringBuilder result = new StringBuilder(length * 2);
int resultLength = 0;
boolean wasPrevTranslated = false;
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++)
{
char c = input.charAt(i);
if (i > 0 || c != '_') // skip first starting underscore
{
if (Character.isUpperCase(c))
{
if (!wasPrevTranslated && resultLength > 0 && result.charAt(resultLength - 1) != '_')
{
result.append('_');
resultLength++;
}
c = Character.toLowerCase(c);
wasPrevTranslated = true;
}
else
{
wasPrevTranslated = false;
}
result.append(c);
resultLength++;
}
}
return resultLength > 0 ? result.toString() : input;
}
});
The accepted answer won't work for my case.
In my case, the class is not owned by me. The problematic class comes from 3rd party dependencies, so I can't just add #JsonProperty annotation in it.
To solve it, inspired by #burak answer above, I created a custom PropertyNamingStrategy as follow:
mapper.setPropertyNamingStrategy(new PropertyNamingStrategy() {
#Override
public String nameForSetterMethod(MapperConfig<?> config, AnnotatedMethod method, String defaultName)
{
if (method.getParameterCount() == 1 &&
(method.getRawParameterType(0) == Boolean.class || method.getRawParameterType(0) == boolean.class) &&
method.getName().startsWith("set")) {
Class<?> containingClass = method.getDeclaringClass();
String potentialFieldName = "is" + method.getName().substring(3);
try {
containingClass.getDeclaredField(potentialFieldName);
return potentialFieldName;
} catch (NoSuchFieldException e) {
// do nothing and fall through
}
}
return super.nameForSetterMethod(config, method, defaultName);
}
#Override
public String nameForGetterMethod(MapperConfig<?> config, AnnotatedMethod method, String defaultName)
{
if(method.hasReturnType() && (method.getRawReturnType() == Boolean.class || method.getRawReturnType() == boolean.class)
&& method.getName().startsWith("is")) {
Class<?> containingClass = method.getDeclaringClass();
String potentialFieldName = method.getName();
try {
containingClass.getDeclaredField(potentialFieldName);
return potentialFieldName;
} catch (NoSuchFieldException e) {
// do nothing and fall through
}
}
return super.nameForGetterMethod(config, method, defaultName);
}
});
Basically what this does is, before serializing and deserializing, it checks in the target/source class which property name is present in the class, whether it is isEnabled or enabled property.
Based on that, the mapper will serialize and deserialize to the property name that is exist.
http://localhost:8080/users?firstName=a&lastName=b ---> where firstName=a and lastName=b
How to make it to or ---> where firstName=a or lastName=b
But when I set QuerydslBinderCustomizer customize
#Override
default public void customize(QuerydslBindings bindings, QUser user) {
bindings.bind(String.class).all((StringPath path, Collection<? extends String> values) -> {
BooleanBuilder predicate = new BooleanBuilder();
values.forEach( value -> predicate.or(path.containsIgnoreCase(value) );
});
}
http://localhost:8080/users?firstName=a&firstName=b&lastName=b ---> where (firstName=a or firstName = b) and lastName=b
It seem different parameters with AND. Same parameters with what I set(predicate.or/predicate.and)
How to make it different parameters with AND like this ---> where firstName=a or firstName=b or lastName=b ??
thx.
Your current request param are grouped as List firstName and String lastName. I see that you want to keep your request parameters without a binding, but in this case it would make your life easier.
My suggestion is to make a new class with request param:
public class UserRequest {
private String lastName;
private List<String> firstName;
// getters and setters
}
For QueryDSL, you can create a builder object:
public class UserPredicateBuilder{
private List<BooleanExpression> expressions = new ArrayList<>();
public UserPredicateBuilder withFirstName(List<String> firstNameList){
QUser user = QUser.user;
expressions.add(user.firstName.in(firstNameList));
return this;
}
//.. same for other fields
public BooleanExpression build(){
if(expressions.isEmpty()){
return Expressions.asBoolean(true).isTrue();
}
BooleanExpression result = expressions.get(0);
for (int i = 1; i < expressions.size(); i++) {
result = result.and(expressions.get(i));
}
return result;
}
}
And after you can just use the builder as :
public List<User> getUsers(UserRequest userRequest){
BooleanExpression expression = new UserPredicateBuilder()
.withFirstName(userRequest.getFirstName())
// other fields
.build();
return userRepository.findAll(expression).getContent();
}
This is the recommended solution.
If you really want to keep the current params without a binding (they still need some kind of validation, otherwise it can throw an Exception in query dsl binding)
you can group them by path :
Map<StringPath,List<String>> values // example firstName => a,b
and after that to create your boolean expression based on the map:
//initial value
BooleanExpression result = Expressions.asBoolean(true).isTrue();
for (Map.Entry entry: values.entrySet()) {
result = result.and(entry.getKey().in(entry.getValues());
}
return userRepository.findAll(result);
Document structure is:
db.lookupdata.insert({ parent_key : "category" , key : "accessories" , value : ["belts","cases","gloves","hair","hats","scarves","sunglasses","ties","wallets","watches"]})
i want to store array filed values in java array list
i am finding the document like this:
FindIterable<Document> iterable1 = docCollectionLookup.find(Filters.eq("parent_key", "category"));
Iterator<Document> iter1=iterable1.iterator();
while(iter1.hasNext())
{
Document theObj = iter1.next();
categotyLookUpMap.put(theObj.getString("key"), list);
}
now here how can i retrieve array field values(key:"value") in ArrayList
You can retrieve array field values(key:"value") in ArrayList just like how you retrieve string field key. Please refer below:
FindIterable<Document> iterable1 = docCollectionLookup.find(Filters.eq("parent_key", "category"));
Iterator<Document> iter1=iterable1.iterator();
//Create a HashMap variable with type <String,ArrayList>,according to your needs
Map<String,ArrayList> categotyLookUpMap = new HashMap<String,ArrayList>();
while(iter1.hasNext())
{
Document theObj = iter1.next();
//Get method of Document class will return object,parse it to ArrayList
categotyLookUpMap.put(theObj.getString("key"), (ArrayList)theObj.get("value"));
}
Alternatively, you can use Morphia which is MongoDB object-document mapper in Java. You can setup dependency / download JAR from here
First, create LookupData class to map to lookupdata collection. Annotation #Id is required else will throw exception with message "No field is annotated with #Id; but it is required". So create an _id field for it.
#Entity("lookupdata")
public class LookupData {
#Id
String _id ;
#Property("parent_key")
String parentKey;
String key;
ArrayList<String> value;
public String get_id() {
return _id;
}
public void set_id(String _id) {
this._id = _id;
}
public String getParentKey() {
return parentKey;
}
public void setParentKey(String parentKey) {
this.parentKey = parentKey;
}
public String getKey() {
return key;
}
public void setKey(String key) {
this.key = key;
}
public void setValue(ArrayList<String> value) {
this.value = value;
}
public ArrayList<String> getValue() {
return value;
}
}
Retrieve array field values as below:
MongoClient mongoClient = new MongoClient(new MongoClientURI("mongodb://localhost"));
Morphia morphia = new Morphia();
morphia.map(LookupData.class);
//lookupdata collection is under my local db "tutorials" in this case
Datastore datastore = morphia.createDatastore(mongoClient, "tutorials");
Map<String,ArrayList> categotyLookUpMap = new HashMap<String,ArrayList>();
LookupData lookupData = datastore.find(LookupData.class).get();
categotyLookUpMap.put(lookupData.getKey(), lookupData.getValue());
How to output a json object of Request.CreateResponse method?
the below code output the json string
"{RowCount:15}"
,the string is not a json ojbect,it should use eval() method of javscript to convert to json object ,I want the server side return the json object directly,
It should return
{RowCount:15}
that's a json object.
Code
public class PagedDataAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute
{
public override void OnActionExecuted(HttpActionExecutedContext actionExecutedContext)
{
string jsonRowCount = "{RowCount:10}";
actionExecutedContext.Response = actionExecutedContext.Request.CreateResponse(System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK, jsonRowCount,System.Net.Http.Formatting.JsonMediaTypeFormatter.DefaultMediaType);
}
}
Instead of using a string, use an anonymous object:
public override void OnActionExecuted(HttpActionExecutedContext actionExecutedContext)
{
var rowCount = new { RowCount = 10 };
actionExecutedContext.Response = actionExecutedContext.Request.CreateResponse(
HttpStatusCode.OK,
rowCount,
JsonMediaTypeFormatter.DefaultMediaType
);
}