On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Paul Lindner <[email protected]> wrote:
> How important is it to support non-bean style getters/setter method names?
> If it's not a problem then we can just check for get/set before checking
> for JsonProperty annotations.
>
> Another thing we could do is check the results of Method#getParameterTypes
> or Method#getReturnType calls to insure we have something that looks like a
> getter/setter
I think it's pretty trivial:
- if it takes no arguments, it's a getter.
- if it does take arguments, it's a setter.
looking at return types doesn't work because it can be ambiguous. Consider
this class:
class Thingamjig {
@JsonProperty("Foo")
Thingamajig setFoo(Foo foo) {
this.foo = foo;
return this;
}
}
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Cassie <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > That makes sense, but unfortunately, the code is already using it in
> > deserialization... in BeanJsonConverter, line 89-119ish, the getSetter
> > method calls getPropertyName which uses the annotation.
> >
> > So, can this be safely changed to check for a different annotation name,
> > like JsonSetterProperty, while leaving the serialization code the same?
> > Because as it stands, its sorta broken. If no one is supposed to be using
> > it, then I suppose it shouldn't affect anyone.
> >
> > - Cassie
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Kevin Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > JsonProperty was originally only added for serialization (as indicated
> by
> > > the documentation). It could certainly be used for deserialization, but
> > the
> > > BeanJsonConverter and JsonSerializer both need to be updated
> accordingly.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Cassie <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey everyone -
> > > >
> > > > I have some legacy objects in my code base that I wanted to convert
> to
> > > and
> > > > from json with the BeanJsonConverter and JsonProperty. Problem is, it
> > > seems
> > > > that the same logic/annotation is being used to find getters and
> > setters
> > > on
> > > > my pojos. So when I try to convert my pojo to a string, it ends up
> > trying
> > > > to
> > > > call setters, and not getters (or vice versa).
> > > >
> > > > For example, I have a class Post.java with two fields "title" and
> > "body".
> > > > Add setters and getters for these fields and things work dandy.
> > However,
> > > I
> > > > need my json to use capital case: "Title" and "Body". To do this I
> > figure
> > > I
> > > > need JsonProperty. So I go and add the JsonProperty("Title") and the
> > > other
> > > > annotation to the setters and who hoo I can take my json into a pojo
> > with
> > > > capital case. But then - on the way from pojo to json the code grabs
> > all
> > > > methods, and if they have a jsonProperty - it puts them in the getter
> > > map!
> > > > Unfortunately, this causes an IllegalArgException because of course
> my
> > > > setters take params, and the code is expecting them to be getters...
> > > >
> > > > So, I'm thinking we either need a JsonGetProperty and JsonSetProperty
> > > > annotation. Or, the code needs to check that a property exists -and-
> > that
> > > > the method starts with "get" or "set" or maybe there is something
> > > better...
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, did I completely screw something up here? Is someone getting
> > this
> > > > to
> > > > work correctly?
> > > > If not, how should we fix it?
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > - Cassie
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
