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.
So i have a class that makes an array list for me and i need to access it in another class through a constructor but i don't know what to put into the constructor because all my methods in that class are just for manipulating that list. im either getting a null pointer exception or a out of bounds exception. ive tried just leaving the constructor empty but that dosent seem to help. thanks in advance. i would show you code but my professor is very strict on academic dishonesty so i cant sorry if that makes it hard.
You are confusing the main question, with a potential solution.
Main Question:
I have a class ArrayListOwnerClass with an enclosed arraylist property or field.
How should another class ArrayListFriendClass access that property.
Potential Solution:
Should I pass the arraylist from ArrayListOwnerClass to ArrayListFriendClass,
in the ArrayListFriendClass constructor ?
It depends on what the second class does with the arraylist.
Instead of passing the list thru the constructor, you may add functions to read or change, as public, the elements of the hidden internal arraylist.
Note: You did not specify a programming language. I'll use C#, altought Java, C++, or similar O.O.P. could be used, instead.
public class ArrayListOwnerClass
{
protected int F_Length;
protected ArrayList F_List;
public ArrayListOwnerClass(int ALength)
{
this.F_Length = ALength;
this.F_List = new ArrayList(ALength);
// ...
} // ArrayListOwnerClass(...)
public int Length()
{
return this.F_Length;
} // int Length(...)
public object getAt(int AIndex)
{
return this.F_List[AIndex];
} // object getAt(...)
public void setAt(int AIndex, object AValue)
{
this.F_List[AIndex] = AValue;
} // void setAt(...)
public void DoOtherStuff()
{
// ...
} // void DoOtherStuff(...)
// ...
} // class ArrayListOwnerClass
public class ArrayListFriendClass
{
public void UseArrayList(ArrayListOwnerClass AListOwner)
{
bool CanContinue =
(AListOwner != null) && (AListOwner.Length() > 0);
if (CanContinue)
{
int AItem = AListOwner.getAt(5);
DoSomethingWith(Item);
} // if (CanContinue)
} // void UseArrayList(...)
public void AlsoDoesOtherStuff()
{
// ...
} // void AlsoDoesOtherStuff(...)
// ...
} // class ArrayListFriendClass
Note, that I could use an indexed property.
i have two Presenters: A DevicePresenter and a ContainerPresenter. I place a PlaceRequest in the DevicePresenter to call the ContainerPresenter with some parameters like this:
PlaceRequest request = new PlaceRequest.Builder()
.nameToken("containersPage")
.with("action","editContainer")
.with("containerEditId", selectedContainerDto.getUuid().toString())
.build();
placeManager.revealPlace(request);
In my ContainersPresenter i have this overridden method:
#Override
public void prepareFromRequest(PlaceRequest placeRequest) {
Log.debug("prepareFromRequest in ContainersPresenter");
super.prepareFromRequest(placeRequest);
String actionString = placeRequest.getParameter("action", "");
String id;
//TODO: Should we change that to really retrieve the object from the server? Or should we introduce a model that keeps all values and inject that into all presenters?
if (actionString.equals("editContainer")) {
try {
id = placeRequest.getParameter("id", null);
for(ContainerDto cont : containerList) {
Log.debug("Compare " + id + " with " + cont.getUuid());
if(id.equals(cont.getUuid())) {
containerDialog.setCurrentContainerDTO(new ContainerDto());
addToPopupSlot(containerDialog);
break;
}
}
} catch (NumberFormatException e) {
Log.debug("id cannot be retrieved from URL");
}
}
}
But when revealPlace is called, the URL in the browser stays the same and the default presenter (Home) is shown instead.
When i print the request, it seems to be fine:
PlaceRequest(nameToken=containersPage, params={action=editContainer, containerEditId=8fa5f730-fe0f-11e3-a3ac-0800200c9a66})
And my NameTokens are like this:
public class NameTokens {
public static final String homePage = "!homePage";
public static final String containersPage = "!containersPage";
public static final String devicesPage = "!devicesPage";
public static String getHomePage() {
return homePage;
}
public static String getDevicesPage() {
return devicesPage;
}
public static String getContainersPage() {
return containersPage;
}
}
What did i miss? Thanks!
In your original code, when constructing your PlaceRequest, you forgot the '!' at the beginning of your nametoken.
.nameToken("containersPage")
while your NameTokens entry is
public static final String containersPage = "!containersPage";
As you noted, referencing the constant in NameTokens is less prone to such easy mistakes to make!
Sometimes the problem exists "between the ears". If i avoid strings but use the proper symbol from NameTokens like
PlaceRequest request = new PlaceRequest.Builder()
.nameToken(NameTokens.containersPage)
.with("action","editContainer")
.with("containerEditId", selectedContainerDto.getUuid().toString())
.build();
it works just fine. Sorry!
I have a scenario where i need to use the payload as
{"authType":"PDS"}
or
{"authType":"xyz","authType2":"abc",}
or
{"authType":"xyz","authType2":"abc","authType3":"123"}
or
any combination except for null values.
referring to the code i have 3 fields but only not null value fields be used.
Basically i don't want to include the field which has null value.
Are there any annotations to be used to get it done
public class AuthJSONRequest {
private String authType;
private String authType2;
private String authType3;
public String getAuthType() {
return authType;
}
public void setAuthType(String authType) {
this.authType = authType;
}
public String getAuthType2() {
return authType2;
}
public void setAuthType2(String authType2) {
this.authType2 = authType2;
}
public String getAuthType3() {
return authType3;
}
public void setAuthType3(String authType3) {
this.authType3 = authType3;
}
}
Try JSON Views? See this or this. Or for more filtering features, see this blog entry (Json Filters for example).
This is exactly what the annotation #JsonInclude in Jackson2 and #JsonSerialize in Jackson are meant for.
If you want a property to show up only when it is not equal to null, add #JsonInclude(Include.NON_NULL) resp. #JsonSerialize(include=Include.NON_NULL).