That makes sense to me -- basically we'd be saying that we require a
top-level annotation if you want to use method- or field-level
annotations.
You can also just go with your original suggestion, but I think that in
that case you could end up with multiple errors for a single class.
Rich
Carlin Rogers wrote:
> Rich,
>
> I'll take a look at this more closely and make sure I follow as I'm
> not yet
> sure how that impacts the use of the @ValidatableBean annotation
> (which is
> used with the validatableBeans attribute of the Controller annot). I
> guess
> either @ValidatableBean or @FormBean would be required for
> @ValidatableProperty?
>
> Thanks,
> Carlin
>
> On 8/15/06, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Carlin,
>>
>> Makes sense -- I'd forgotten that we don't require the annotation.
>> Seems like we're being too lax in this case -- I actually think
that it
>> would be best to require the @FormBean annotation when using any
of the
>> @ValidatableProperty annotations. We don't want to require @FormBean
>> just to use an external bean, but I don't see the harm in
requiring it
>> when any of the other annotations are used inside the bean. That
way,
>> we can preserve the idea of a standalone checker.
>>
>> For back-compat, you could run a checker on any external form bean
from
>> within PageFlowChecker (as you suggested), but only when there is
*no*
>> @FormBean. If you encounter any @ValidatableProperty annotations in
>> that case, you could deprecation-warn that @FormBean should be used.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Rich
>>
>> Carlin Rogers wrote:
>> > Rich,
>> >
>> > I have a question about the suggestion to create and use the FBAPF.
It
>> > seems
>> > that this would work only in the case that the standalone includes
>> the @
>> > Jpf.FormBean annotation. However, users can define validation rules
>> > without
>> > @Jpf.FormBean and just use @Jpf.ValidatableProperty. The FormBean
>> > allows the
>> > class to define its own message bundle for validation errors, but
it's
>> > just
>> > an option.
>> >
>> > We need to make sure that we check the ValidatableProperty before
>> > going to
>> > generate() to provide AP error information. The ValidatableProperty
>> > can be
>> > on a method (of a bean) and an annotation type (listed in the @
>> > Jpf.Controller or @Jpf.Action). Since it's not just associated to a
>> type,
>> > would we still be able to do something like you suggested and
create
>> > an AP
>> > factory for ValidatableProperty? Maybe I'm missing something though
>> with
>> > what you were suggesting.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Carlin
>> >
>> > On 8/14/06, Rich Feit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hey Carlin,
>> >>
>> >> I think what might be better would be to make a
>> >> FormBeanAnnotationProcessorFactory in
>> >> compiler-apt/org/apache/beehive/netui/compiler/apt, and make it
>> >> responsible for the form bean annotation (you'd need to remove
that
>> >> annotation from the list of supported annotations in
>> >> PageFlowAnnotationProcessorFactory). FBAPF could then simply
>> return a
>> >> FormBeanCoreAnnotationProcessorFactory -- which already exists
-- in
>> its
>> >> getCoreProcessorFor(). I honestly cannot remember why I didn't do
>> that
>> >> -- sorry.
>> >>
>> >> If it turns out that this doesn't work for some reason, you could
>> also
>> >> roll the functionality from FormBeanCoreAnnotationProcessor into
>> >> PageFlowCoreAnnotationProcessor (and to delete the former).
>> >>
>> >> In either case, you end up with standalone checking form bean
>> classes,
>> >> which is nicer because you don't have to worry about multiple
>> >> PageFlowCheckers triggering checking on the same external form
bean
>> >> class, and it's just cleaner to have it be standalone.
>> >>
>> >> All that said, I didn't wire it up in the first place, so if
you run
>> >> into any difficulties let me know -- it's possible there's
something
>> I'm
>> >> missing here.
>> >>
>> >> Rich
>> >>
>> >> Carlin Rogers wrote:
>> >> > I'm taking a look at BEEHIVE-1127 and wanted to share some
thoughts
>> >> about
>> >> > ensuring the annotation processing of validatable bean
properties
>> >> > declared
>> >> > in an external form bean class during the check() phase.
>> >> >
>> >> > The current implementation for processing of the Controller
>> >> > annotations does
>> >> > not process external form bean during the check() phase of the
>> >> > TwoPhaseCoreAnnotationProcessor. During the Controller
annotation
>> >> > processing, FlowControllerChecker.onCheck() creates the
>> >> > FormBeanChecker and
>> >> > then during the onCheckInternal() uses it to check
>> ValidatableProperty
>> >> > annotations on inner classes only.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'd like to modify FlowControllerChecker.checkMethod() (for
action
>> >> > grammar
>> >> > checking) to also look at the parameter of an action and
check for
>> >> > validation rules. The change would only use the
FormBeanChecker on
>> the
>> >> > parameter class if it is a ClassDeclaration without a declaring
>> type
>> >> > (so we
>> >> > don't re-check an inner class). Does this sound right? Anyone
have
>> >> some
>> >> > additional thoughts?
>> >> >
>> >> > Rich, do you have some input on this AP change?
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> > Carlin
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
