I'd like write a custom type conversion Category in Groovy. The goal is to assign the values of a Map to the fields of a Groovy bean. In the future there will be different response types. The values of of the Map are always of type String but will have to be converted into a different data type. To make this work I created a Category class that implements a method named asType. This is a simplified example of my code:
class MapCategory {
static Object asType(Map self, Class clazz) {
if(clazz == Response) {
Response response = new Response()
self.each { key, value ->
response.setProperty(key, value)
}
return response
}
DefaultGroovyMethods.asType(self, clazz)
}
}
class Response {
String result
String message
}
This works just fine when when I apply the category using the use keyword.
use(MapCategory) {
println [result: 'OK', message: 'Success'] as Response
}
However, when I try to use the #Mixin annotation instead it doesn't seem to work correctly. I get the correct response type but all fields are null.
#Mixin(MapCategory)
class MyClass {
def printResponse() {
println [result: 'OK', message: 'Success'] as Response
}
}
Does anybody know why it doesn't work correctly using the annotation?
Mixins don't work that way. You are trying to mix in the method for Map into your MyClass object. The mixin would only work if MyClass extended Map.
Instead, you want to use the use keyword like normal, and just use your category as a category.
Alternatively, you might not need it at all. Did you know that you can, by default, convert any map into any GroovyBean without extra code? Just use the map-based constructor, like so:
#groovy.transform.Canonical // Groovy 1.8, just added for automatic toString method
class Response {
String result
String message
}
println new Response([result: 'OK', message: 'Success'])
println([result: 'bad', message: 'blah'] as Response)
Notice, automatic Map conversion works both ways. It's a built-in feature of Groovy.
Of course, if you need something more complex than just assigning bean properties, this won't help.
Note: I'd give you a link, but the Groovy website appears to be broken, and I can't find code examples. :-(
EDIT: Another Suggestion
Instead of using a Category at all, why don't you let the bean itself handle it:
#groovy.transform.Canonical
class Response {
String result
String message
int num
public void setNum(String num) {
this.num = Integer.parseInt(num)
}
}
def map = [result: 'OK', message: 'Success', num: '35' ]
println map as Response
Related
The class has a function:
fun theFunc(uri: Uri, theMap: Map<String, String>?, callback: ICallback) {
......
}
and would like to verify it is called with proper params type
io.mockk.verify { mock.theFunc(ofType(Uri::class), ofType(Map<String, String>::class), ofType(ICallbak::class)) }
the ofType(Uri::class) is ok,
the ofType(Map<String, String>::class got error:
the ofType(ICallbak::class) got error:
ICallback does not have a companion object, thus must be initialized
here.
How to use the ofType() for Map and interface?
The problem is that generic parameters are lost at runtime due to type erasure, and for this reason the syntax doesn't allow generic parameters to be specified in that context. You can write Map::class but not Map<String, String>::class because a Map<String, String> is just a Map at runtime.
So, you can call it like this:
verify { mock.theFunc(ofType(Uri::class), ofType(Map::class), ofType(ICallback::class)) }
that will work. However, there is also a version of function ofType which takes generic parameters, so you can use this:
verify { mock.theFunc(ofType<Uri>(), ofType<Map<String, String>>(), ofType<ICallback>()) }
You need to use mapOf<String,String>::class
io.mockk.verify { mock.theFunc(ofType(Uri::class), ofType(mapOf<String,String>()::class), ofType(ICallbak)) }
For interface, you can create mocck object. And put it into ofType.
val callbackMock: ICallback = mockk()
io.mockk.verify { mock.theFunc(ofType(Uri::class), ofType(mapOf<String,String>()::class), ofType(callbackMock::class)) }
I'm not sure if this is a limitation, a bug or just bad use of GSON. I need to have a hierarchy of Kotlin objects (parent with various subtypes) and I need to deserialize them with GSON. The deserialized object has correct subtype but its field enumField is actually null.
First I thought this is because the field is passed to the "super" constructor but then I found out that "super" works well for string, just enum is broken.
See this example:
import com.google.gson.Gson
import com.google.gson.GsonBuilder
import com.google.gson.typeadapters.RuntimeTypeAdapterFactory
open class Parent(val stringField: String,
val enumField: EnumField) {
enum class EnumField {
SUBTYPE1,
SUBTYPE2,
SUBTYPE3
}
}
class Subtype1() : Parent("s1", EnumField.SUBTYPE1)
class Subtype2(stringField: String) : Parent(stringField, EnumField.SUBTYPE2)
class Subtype3(stringField: String, type: EnumField) : Parent(stringField, type)
val subtypeRAF = RuntimeTypeAdapterFactory.of(Parent::class.java, "enumField")
.registerSubtype(Subtype1::class.java, Parent.EnumField.SUBTYPE1.name)
.registerSubtype(Subtype2::class.java, Parent.EnumField.SUBTYPE2.name)
.registerSubtype(Subtype3::class.java, Parent.EnumField.SUBTYPE3.name)
fun main() {
val gson = GsonBuilder()
.registerTypeAdapterFactory(subtypeRAF)
.create()
serializeAndDeserialize(gson, Subtype1()) // this works (but not suitable)
serializeAndDeserialize(gson, Subtype2("s2")) // broken
serializeAndDeserialize(gson, Subtype3("s3", Parent.EnumField.SUBTYPE3)) // broken
}
private fun serializeAndDeserialize(gson: Gson, obj: Parent) {
println("-----------------------------------------")
val json = gson.toJson(obj)
println(json)
val obj = gson.fromJson(json, Parent::class.java)
println("stringField=${obj.stringField}, enumField=${obj.enumField}")
}
Any ideas how to achieve to deserialization of enumField?
(deps: com.google.code.gson:gson:2.8.5, org.danilopianini:gson-extras:0.2.1)
P.S.: Note that I have to use RuntimeAdapterFactory because I have subtypes with different set of fields (I did not do it in the example so it is easier to understand).
Gson requires constructors without arguments to work properly (see deep-dive into Gson code below). Gson constructs raw objects and then use reflection to populate fields with values.
So if you just add some argument-less dummy constructors to your classes that miss them, like this:
class Subtype1() : Parent("s1", EnumField.SUBTYPE1)
class Subtype2(stringField: String) : Parent(stringField, EnumField.SUBTYPE2) {
constructor() : this("")
}
class Subtype3(stringField: String, type: EnumField) : Parent(stringField, type) {
constructor() : this("", EnumField.SUBTYPE3)
}
you will get the expected output:
-----------------------------------------
{"stringField":"s1","enumField":"SUBTYPE1"}
stringField=s1, enumField=SUBTYPE1
-----------------------------------------
{"stringField":"s2","enumField":"SUBTYPE2"}
stringField=s2, enumField=SUBTYPE2
-----------------------------------------
{"stringField":"s3","enumField":"SUBTYPE3"}
stringField=s3, enumField=SUBTYPE3
Gson deep-dive
If you want to investigate the internals of Gson, a tip is to add an init { } block to Subtype1 since it works and then set a breakpoint there. After it is hit you can move up the call stack, step through code, set more breakpoints etc, to reveal the details of how Gson constructs objects.
By using this method, you can find the Gson internal class com.google.gson.internal.ConstructorConstructor and its method newDefaultConstructor(Class<? super T>) that has code like this (I have simplified for brevity):
final Constructor<? super T> constructor = rawType.getDeclaredConstructor(); // rawType is e.g. 'class Subtype3'
Object[] args = null;
return (T) constructor.newInstance(args);
i.e. it tries to construct an object via a constructor without arguments. In your case for Subtype2 and Subtype3, the code will result in a caught exception:
} catch (NoSuchMethodException e) { // java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: Subtype3.<init>()
return null; // set breakpoint here to see
}
i.e. your original code fails since Gson can't find constructors without arguments for Subtype2 and Subtype3.
In simple cases, the problem with missing argument-less constructors is worked around with the newUnsafeAllocator(Type, final Class<? super T>)-method in ConstructorConstructor, but with RuntimeTypeAdapterFactory that does not work correctly.
I may be missing something in what you're trying to achieve, but is it necessary to use the RuntimeTypeAdapterFactory? If we take out the line where we register that in the Gson builder, so that it reads
val gson = GsonBuilder()
.create()
Then the output returns the enum we would expect, which looks to be serialising / deserialising correctly. I.e. the output is:
-----------------------------------------
{"stringField":"s1","enumField":"SUBTYPE1"}
stringField=s1, enumField=SUBTYPE1
-----------------------------------------
{"stringField":"s2","enumField":"SUBTYPE2"}
stringField=s2, enumField=SUBTYPE2
-----------------------------------------
{"stringField":"s3","enumField":"SUBTYPE3"}
stringField=s3, enumField=SUBTYPE3
It also may be an idea to implement Serializable in Parent. i.e.
open class Parent(val stringField: String, val enumField: EnumField) : Serializable {
enum class EnumField {
SUBTYPE1,
SUBTYPE2,
SUBTYPE3
}
}
Try adding #SerializedName annotation to each enum.
enum class EnumField {
#SerializedName("subtype1")
SUBTYPE1,
#SerializedName("subtype2")
SUBTYPE2,
#SerializedName("subtype3")
SUBTYPE3
}
The akka-http 2.4.7 reference states that it's possible to do custom Deserializers to convert query parameters, without storing them in an intermediate variable:
"amount".as[Int] extract value of parameter "amount" as Int, you need a matching Deserializer in scope for that to work (see also Unmarshalling)
"amount".as(deserializer) extract value of parameter "amount" with an explicit Deserializer
However, the Deserialized parameter sample on that page does not show how custom deserializers are being used.
How do I define one, so that I can say, e.g. .as[MyType]?
I think the documentation is at fault, because I cannot find a Deserializer mentioned anywhere in akka sources: search
Screenshot on how Deserializer is typeset in the Akka docs.
A Deserializer is just a name for an Unmarshaller in akka-http 2.4.7 (same for akka-http 2.4.8)
Edit: Let's say you're extracting a query parameter named type, and you want a Deserializer that can pattern-match that type parameter from a String to a MyType.
Your route that's in your server app may look like this:
object MyServer {
...
// Assuming that you're requiring a
// `type` parameter from a `POST` request
import MyType._
val route =
post {
parameter('type.as(myTypeDeserializer)) { myTypeValue =>
complete {
// `myTypeValue` is already pattern-matched
// to type `MyType` here thanks to `myTypeDeserializer`
...
}
}
}
...
}
Your MyType object may look like this:
object MyType {
case object Type1 extends MyType
case object Type2 extends MyType
case object Type3 extends MyType
import akka.http.scaladsl.unmarshalling.Unmarshaller
// Here we pattern match the query parameter,
// which has type `String`, to a `MyType`
val stringToMyType = Unmarshaller.strict[String, MyType] {
case "type1" => MyType.Type1
case "type2" => MyType.Type2
case "type3" => MyType.Type3
}
}
Hence akka-http will automatically throw a BadRequest response if user requests an unsupported type parameter.
I was able to declare the custom query parameter marshaller right, based on the PredefinedFromStringUnmarshallers.scala built-in samples.
implicit val desId: Unmarshaller[String,Context.Id] = Unmarshaller.strict[String, Context.Id] { s =>
Context.Id.parseOpt(s).getOrElse(
if (s=="") throw Unmarshaller.NoContentException
else throw new IllegalArgumentException( s"Not a valid id: '$s'" )
)
}
Providing the return type explicitly seems to matter.
I have received a JavaScript object in response to a remote HTTP request. I have a kotlin model (trait) that defines the various fields I expect on the object (the nullable ones are optional).
First, I want to do an is check to make sure my object is in fact of the expected type. I initially tried payload is MyModel but that doesn't work due to the way the is operator is written in kotlin.js.
Second, I want to cast to MyModel so I can get auto-complete, etc. on the object while I work with it. Normally, the is alone would be enough but since that doesn't work I need something for this problem as well.
I would like to avoid manually populating my object from a dynamic. I wouldn't mind doing this so much if I could use by Delegates.mapVal(...) but that requires a Map<String, Any?> and I don't know how to get my dynamic/Any? payload into a Map<String, Any?>.
1) We don't have structure check for is in performance reasons.
I don't sure that we need generic solution for this, but anyway I created issue about it, feel free to vote or star it to get updates.
2) is enough if you use smart cast, like:
if (payload is MyModel) {
// call MyModel members on payload
}
But don't forget about (1) :)
3) You can write something like:
class MapDynamic<out V>(val d: dynamic) {
public fun get(thisRef: Any, desc: PropertyMetadata): V {
return d[desc.name]
}
}
class Foo(data: dynamic) {
val field: Int by MapDynamic(data)
}
fun main(args : Array<String>) {
val f = Foo(object { val field = 123 })
println(f.field)
}
But it looks too verbose, but You can add additional logic for e.g. when data don't have requested field. And if You don't need custom logic I think cast is enough.
For the second part, the cast, you can do:
fun responseHandler(payload: dynamic) {
val myModel = payload as MyModel
}
or
fun responseHandler(payload: dynamic) {
val myModel: MyModel = payload
}
This will throw an NPE if payload is null, but it won't actually validate that the payload matches MyModel. In particular, you may end up with null fields/properties that shouldn't be if the payload was missing those fields/properties.
I'm experimenting with PetaPoco to convert a table into POCOs.
In my table, I've got a column named TheEnum. The values in this column are strings that represent the following enum:
public enum MyEnum
{
Fred,
Wilma
}
PetaPoco chokes when it tries to convert the string "Fred" into a MyEnum value.
It does this in the GetConverter method, in the line:
Convert.ChangeType( src, dstType, null );
Here, src is "Fred" (a string), and dstType is typeof(MyEnum).
The exception is an InvalidCastException, saying Invalid cast from 'System.String' to 'MyEnum'
Am I missing something? Is there something I need to register first?
I've got around the problem by adding the following into the GetConverter method:
if (dstType.IsEnum && srcType == typeof(string))
{
converter = delegate( object src )
{
return Enum.Parse( dstType, (string)src ) ;
} ;
}
Obviously, I don't want to run this delegate on every row as it'll slow things down tremendously. I could register this enum and its values into a dictionary to speed things up, but it seems to me that something like this would likely already be in the product.
So, my question is, do I need to do anything special to register my enums with PetaPoco?
Update 23rd February 2012
I submitted a patch a while ago but it hasn't been pulled in yet. If you want to use it, look at the patch and merge into your own code, or get just the code from here.
I'm using 4.0.3 and PetaPoco automatically converts enums to integers and back. However, I wanted to convert my enums to strings and back. Taking advantage of Steve Dunn's EnumMapper and PetaPoco's IMapper, I came up with this. Thanks guys.
Note that it does not handle Nullable<TEnum> or null values in the DB. To use it, set PetaPoco.Database.Mapper = new MyMapper();
class MyMapper : PetaPoco.IMapper
{
static EnumMapper enumMapper = new EnumMapper();
public void GetTableInfo(Type t, PetaPoco.TableInfo ti)
{
// pass-through implementation
}
public bool MapPropertyToColumn(System.Reflection.PropertyInfo pi, ref string columnName, ref bool resultColumn)
{
// pass-through implementation
return true;
}
public Func<object, object> GetFromDbConverter(System.Reflection.PropertyInfo pi, Type SourceType)
{
if (pi.PropertyType.IsEnum)
{
return dbObj =>
{
string dbString = dbObj.ToString();
return enumMapper.EnumFromString(pi.PropertyType, dbString);
};
}
return null;
}
public Func<object, object> GetToDbConverter(Type SourceType)
{
if (SourceType.IsEnum)
{
return enumVal =>
{
string enumString = enumMapper.StringFromEnum(enumVal);
return enumString;
};
}
return null;
}
}
You're right, handling enums is not built into PetaPoco and usually I just suggest doing exactly what you've done.
Note that this won't slow things down for requests that don't use the enum type. PetaPoco generates code to map responses to pocos so the delegate will only be called when really needed. In other words, the GetConverter will only be called the first time a particular poco type is used, and the delegate will only be called when an enum needs conversion. Not sure on the speed of Enum.Parse, but yes you could cache in a dictionary if it's too slow.
If you are using PetaPoco's T4 generation and you want enums in your generated type, you can use the PropertyType override in Database.tt:
tables["App"]["Type"].PropertyType = "Full.Namespace.To.AppType";
I you want to store the value of the enum instead of the index number (1,2,4 for example) you can locate the update function in PetaPoco class because the code is "managed" etc, when you add it as nuget package it will store the .cs file to your project. If we would have the enum variable Color = {red, yellow, blue}
Instead of:
// Store the parameter in the command
AddParam(cmd, pc.GetValue(poco), pc.PropertyInfo);
change to:
//enum?
if (i.Value.PropertyInfo.PropertyType.IsEnum)
{
AddParam(cmd, i.Value.GetValue(poco).ToString(), i.Value.PropertyInfo);
}
else
{
// Store the parameter in the command
AddParam(cmd, i.Value.GetValue(poco), i.Value.PropertyInfo);
}
It would store "yellow" instead of 2