Added issue here: https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-databind/issues/1376
Thanks!
On Saturday, September 10, 2016 at 10:17:45 PM UTC-4, Tatu Saloranta wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Brent Ryan <brent...@gmail.com
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> So using a mixin did NOT work. Here's the mixin:
>>
>> interface DisableAdditionalPropertiesMixIn {
>>
>> @JsonIgnore
>> Map<String, Object> getAdditionalProperties();
>>
>> @JsonIgnore
>> void setAdditionalProperty(String name, Object value);
>> }
>>
>> m.addMixInAnnotations(Data.class, DisableAdditionalPropertiesMixIn.class);
>>
>> This basically did nothing. My guess is that mixins only allow you to
>> add OR override any existing annotation, but not remove it/ignore it unless
>> the annotation itself supports some flag you can set to disable it.
>>
>
> Mix-in annotations are very simple: they only allow you to add a "missing"
> annotation, or replace existing one. But there is no per-annotation logic
> to replace other annotations: for example, just because you add
> `@JsonIgnore` does not remove `@JsonAnySetter` or `@JsonAnyGetter`.
>
> However... aside from mix-ins, perhaps behavior of having both
> `@JsonIgnore` and any-setter/any-getter annotation ought to mean that the
> accessor is ignored, and not considered any-setter/any-getter?
> This logic would reside at code that determines actual bean definition,
> outside of mix-in handler, and I don't think ignorals are currently
> considered.
>
> One other related comment on disabling annotations: it is actually
> possible to also "undo" ignoral by using mix-in for
>
> @JsonIgnore(false)
>
> since @JsonIgnore does take boolean value (with default of `true`): it
> determines if ignorals is enabled or not. And the only reason for that is
> to allow overriding an existing ignoral either by sub-class (annotations
> are inherited, so sub-classes can override annotations), or by mix-ins.
>
> Come to think of this now, another possibly better improvement, to allow
> disabling, would be to make @JsonAnyGetter and @JsonAnySetter to also use
> boolean `value`, similar to @JsonIgnore.
>
> If so, you could add, via mix-in:
>
> @JsonAnySetter(false)
>
> to effectively disable usage.
>
>
>> So instead, I did this:
>>
>>
>> public class IgnoreAdditionalPropertiesInspector extends
>> JacksonAnnotationIntrospector {
>>
>> @Override
>> public boolean hasAnySetterAnnotation(AnnotatedMethod am) {
>> return false;
>> }
>>
>> @Override
>> public boolean hasAnyGetterAnnotation(AnnotatedMethod am) {
>> return false;
>> }
>>
>> }
>>
>> JacksonAnnotationIntrospector introspector = new
>> IgnoreAdditionalPropertiesInspector();
>> m.setAnnotationIntrospector(introspector);
>>
>>
>> This works! woohoo!
>>
>
> Yes, that makes sense to me.
>
>
>>
>> However, I'm curious if there's any better way to achieve this or is this
>> the recommended approach?
>>
>
> I think your approach is very sensible and something I could have
> recommended myself.
>
> But I think this does also raise the question of whether override system
> for any-properties could and should be improved.
>
> Could you file an issue (RFE) for this at:
>
> https://github.com/FasterXML/jackson-databind/issues
>
> so that we could perhaps get it added in 2.9? I know it is not something
> you need, with AnnotationIntrospector, but seems a worthwhile and quite
> straight-forward addition.
>
> -+ Tatu +-
>
>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>> On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 6:50:48 PM UTC-4, Brent Ryan wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm going to attempt to do this by just creating a
>>> DisableAdditionalPropertiesMixin class that I can apply. I'm not sure this
>>> will work and it kinda sucks because it means that the only way for it to
>>> work for everything is to apply this to every Object in the hierarchy.
>>>
>>> Any other ideas here?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 6:07:47 PM UTC-4, Brent Ryan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We're looking to see if there's a way to use the same model with
>>>> @JsonAnySetter jackson pattern for serialization to backend data storage,
>>>> while allowing us to use the same models for the inbound API requests that
>>>> are more strict. So we want FAIL_ON_UNKNOWN_PROPERTIES set to true and
>>>> @JsonAnySetter to be disabled from the API perspective.
>>>>
>>>> Is there a way to do this or do you have to have 2 separate models or
>>>> use mix-ins? Looking for the preferred approach to dealing with this.
>>>>
>>>> Example class:
>>>>
>>>> public class Data {
>>>>
>>>> @JsonIgnore
>>>> private Map<String, Object> additionalProperties = new
>>>> HashMap<String, Object>();
>>>>
>>>> @JsonAnyGetter
>>>> public Map<String, Object> getAdditionalProperties() {
>>>> return this.additionalProperties;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> @JsonAnySetter
>>>> public void setAdditionalProperty(String name, Object value) {
>>>> this.additionalProperties.put(name, value);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Is there a way to disable a feature in ObjectMapper that turns off the
>>>> JsonAnySetter/JsonAnyGetter for 1 use case, but then enables it for others?
>>>>
>>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "jackson-user" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to jackson-user...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
>> To post to this group, send email to jackso...@googlegroups.com
>> <javascript:>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jackson-user" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to jackson-user+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to jackson-user@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
