I don't have any strong opinion. I'd be tempted to say you are right. It seems to be somebody expecting a non indexable path would not be hurt if the Path structure returned an indexable version. Can you also create a BVAL issue so that the spec gets clarified.
On 21 avr. 2011, at 00:11, Gunnar Morling wrote: > Hi guys, > > there was an interesting question on the Validator forum > (https://forum.hibernate.org/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1010626&start=0) > which IMO boils down to the question whether the static or the runtime > type of an association should be considered when creating property > paths in case of cascading validations. > > An example: > > class Foo { > > private Collection<Bar> bar1 = new ArrayList<Bar>(); > > private List<Bar> bar2 = new ArrayList<Bar>(); > > } > > When validating an instance of Foo (which has invalid elements in > bar1/bar2) with HV, the resulting property path node for bar1 would be > iterable but not indexable ("bar1[]"), while the property path node > for bar2 would be iterable and indexable ("bar2[123]"). This is that > way because the static type of bar1/bar2 (Collection vs. List) is > considered when building the nodes, and not the runtime type > (ArrayList in both cases). > > That said, basing the path on the runtime type instead would seem > reasonable to me, too (as for instance the constraints to validate are > also determined based on the runtime type of references). I scanned > through the BV spec. (section 4.5) but didn't find a clear answer > which approach should be followed. Are there any opinions on that? > > Thanks, > > Gunnar _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
