A simple question (I hope so...) for RESTEasy experts.
I receive a form posted via POST which contains attributes with '-' in their names :
Example :
return-code=12
I want to map all the content of this POST into a Pojo :
public class MyFormInfo {
public String attr1="";
public String return_code=""; // don't work because return-code is not mapped in return_code
...
The method declaration is the following :
#POST
#Path("/return-cic-payment")
public String receiveForm(MyFormInfo form) throws Exception {
log.info("Return-code is : {}", form.return_code);
}
I don't to map attributes one by one in the parameters lists because the form contains a large number of fields.
Because I can't have an attribute named "return-code" in my POJO, I wonder how to do toget this parameter's value.
A custom mapping can be a solution, but I don't know how to achieve that.
Other idea I try without success, to receive a Map of attribute.
Thanks for your help.
Try this: http://docs.jboss.org/resteasy/docs/1.0.0.GA/userguide/html_single/#_Form
class MyFormInfo{
#FormParam("return-code")
private String returnCode;
//etc.
}
Related
I understand I can use code similar to the below to change the property name from Name to name when it is serialized but I also want to change the object name when it is serialized and returned using return something like Ok(myobj);
But, is it possible to do something similar for the class as below so it is serialized as person and not Person. I've looked at JsonObject but can't see anything on there.
[JsonObject(PropertyName="person")]
public class Person
{
[JsonProperty(PropertyName = "name")]
public String Name { get; set; }
}
If you just want your class name to start with a lowercase letter, you can do this:
[JsonObject(NamingStrategyType = typeof(CamelCaseNamingStrategy))]
public class Person
{
}
This would set the first letter of your class name to lowercase since it uses CamelCaseNamingStategy, you can also create your own custom naming strategy to fit your needs, implementation of existing naming stategies can be found here: (https://github.com/JamesNK/Newtonsoft.Json/tree/master/Src/Newtonsoft.Json/Serialization)
You will need another wrapper object to have like that. You can use:
return Ok(new{
Person = myobj
});
I want to replace the [Required] attribute on the Gig property of the class Notification with the following fluent api expression.
public class NotificationConfiguration : EntityTypeConfiguration<Notification>
{
public NotificationConfiguration()
{
Property(n => n.Gig).IsRequired();
}
}
If I do so, the compiler throws an error CS0453:
The type 'Gig' must be a non-nullable value type in order to use it as parameter 'T' in the generic type or method 'StructuralTypeConfiguration'<Notification>.Property<T>(Expression<Func<Notification, T>>)'
I cannot see the reason, why this isn't working.
Thanks!
My mistake ;-)
Gig is an object with a table representation, so this must be a navigation property to that table instead of a required field. So the code looks like this:
public class NotificationConfiguration : EntityTypeConfiguration<Notification>
{
public NotificationConfiguration()
{
HasRequired(n => n.Gig);
}
}
In our project (springMVC) Rest API project I wish to only use ONE model for both request and response (to avoid having to add tons of code to copy field from object to object)
I'd like to use Swagger to handle all the doc, but I'm running into a little problem. For example let say I have a model User
public class User {
private Long id;
private String username;
private String password;
}
And a simple controller
public void createUser(#RequestBody User user)...
public User getUser(Long id) ..
Now I would like swagger to hide the property password on deserialization but not serialization (so having it display for the Input but the output)
and the opposite for the Id field.
I have tried using #JsonIgnore coupled with #JsonProperty but on the swagager-ui it either displays everything or hides everything. I cannot manage to it work.
Could someone indicate me what is the best way of archiving my goal ? Is it possible to use a single model for request and response while using swagger? In case it is not possible to use #JsonIgnore, is there a way to archive this differently ?
Swagger doesn't want you to have different input/output models with the same name. You should simply create an interface and attach that to the input, and for the output extend that interface or add an implementation with the additional field. For example, please see here for modeling tips:
https://swaggerhub.com/api/swagger-tutorials/modeling-samples/1.0.0
Your exact use case is one of them. The solution posted in the above link is here:
definitions:
User:
description: this is a user that would be passed into the system
properties:
username:
type: string
UserResponse:
allOf:
- $ref: '#/definitions/User'
- type: object
required:
- id
properties:
id:
type: string
format: uuid
readOnly: true
where User is the input object, and UserResponse is the output object, with the additional id field.
Add #JsonIgnore with getter of the field and #JsonProperty with the setter or with the field . As Due to use of immutable code or final fields sometime setter doesn't work.
example :
public class Student {
private Float name;
private String rollnum;
private String section;
#JsonProperty
private Boolean passOrFailed;
#JsonIgnore
public Boolean getpassOrFailed {
return active;
}
}
Remember to use both else else it will lead to removing element in deserialization
I have a base class ReportElement which has type property:
public abstract class ReportElement {
private ReportElementType type;
public ReportElementType getType() {
return type;
}
public void setType(ReportElementType type) {
this.type = type;
}
}
ReportElementType is just an enum with specified code and i18nKey properties for each element. I have a couple of subclasses of ReportElement, each of them introducing their own properties. One of them is Plot:
public class Plot extends ReportElement {
public Plot() {
setType(ReportElementType.PLOT);
}
private Collection<Parameter> parameters = new ArrayList<Parameter>();
public Collection<Parameter> getParameters() {
return parameters;
}
}
On some page I needed to display a collection of different ReportElement instances, so I just used struts2 select tag:
<s:select list="myElements" listKey="type.code" listValue="type.i18nKey" size="20"/>
This worked like a charm for every element except for Plot instaces. Instead of invoking getType().getCode() or getType().getI18nKey() plain toString() was invoked on every instance of Plot! After several hours of fun debugging I noticed that during tag evaluation Plot's getParameters() method is called! So it seems struts was trying to evaluate type.code and type.i18nKey using getParameters() method! Failing to do that it ignored the existence of the properties, that I have clearly specified for usage!
After renaming getParameters to a kind of odd name like getParamms the problem gone. Also the problem hasn't occured when using iterator tag together with property tag instead of select tag.
Does anyone have an idea WHY struts select tag uses parameters property of my bean, when I have clearly specified what property should be used? Is it some "cool" feature or a bug?
P.S. I use struts 2.2.3.1
The argument used in all the FreeMarker templates representing a tag's parameters is called parameters. By providing a parameters property that takes precedence, S2 was unable to get to the object on the stack containing the tag's parameters.
It's neither a cool feature nor a bug, it's just how the templates are implemented. Checking the template source may have saved the few hours of debugging.
Found corresponding issue in struts JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WW-3268
2.3 is specified as fix version.
does anyone know why I can't do this ?
public class CreateScenarioHandler :
GL.RRSL.RequestHandler<CommandRequest<ScenarioProfileData>,
CommandResponse<ScenarioProfileData>>
why is it imposible for Agatha to figure out the type of the generic Request. It is defined there. ?
Type 'GL.RequestResponse.CommandRequest`1[T]' cannot be exported as a schema type because it is an open generic type. You can only export a generic type if all its generic parameter types are actual types.
any ideas of how to do this. It feels so restrictive to have to create a request object for each type of operation.
I'm actually using generic requests/responses successfully.
The trick was to register closed generic requests/responses as known-types.
In order to achieve this, I'm using the following conventions:
generic requests/responses can have only one generic parameter
that generic parameter should has a generic constraint that specifies that it should implement a given interface
I'm using this convention to construct every possible closed generic type
that I'm going to be using as request or response.
For example, I can have something like this:
interface IDtoWithId
{
int Id { get; }
}
public class GetEntityRequest<TDto> : Request where TDto : IDtoWithId
{
....
}
public class UserDto : IDtoWithId
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
}
Then, when configuring Agatha, I'm using something like
this https://gist.github.com/916352 and doing:
....
configuration.Initialize();
KnownTypeProvider.ClearAllKnownTypes();
KnownTypeHelper.RegisterRequestsAndResponses(typeof(UserDto).Assembly);
The KnownTypeHelper registers the GetEntityRequest type as a
known-type and that allow me to handle that request using a handler
hierarchy like this:
public abstract class GetEntityHandler<TEntity, TDto> :
RequestHandler<GetEntityRequest<TDto>, GetEntityResponse<TDto>>
{
...
}
public class GetUserHandler : GetEntityHandler<User, UserDto>
{
}
I'm using this approach for the CRUD part of an application and it is
working very well.
The problem here has to do with how CommandRequest and CommandResponse are defined.
Agatha looks at the classes which extends Request and Response and add's them to the known types in the WCF.
When the server starts the service, WCF complains that the type CommandRequest is generic and can't be used. WCF if saying that it can't claim to know about a generic type.
When I define CommandRequest and CommandResponse as abstract, and then create classes like ScenarioIORequest/Response which extend CommandRequest and CommandResponse respectively with the apropiate type to be wrapped, WCF does not complain.
It feels like a waste that I have to define specific types when I would like to have generic requests and responses for different DTO. Maybe this will change at some point, but it seams to be WCF issue rather then the Agatha project issue.