[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-5491?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
John Wagenleitner updated GROOVY-5491:
--------------------------------------
Description:
Creating a subclass of java.util.HashMap with properties defined results in
inconsistent and confusing behavior.
{code:java}
class MapSub extends HashMap {
def foo
}
// Using dot notation to get the property results in a map key lookup.
def m = new MapSub(foo: 'bar')
println m.foo // prints 'null'
println m.getFoo() // prints 'bar'
// Using same dot notation to set the property results in property setter.
m.foo = 'baz'
println m.foo // still prints 'null'
println m.getFoo() // prints 'baz'
{code}
This behavior results in subtle and hard to track bugs. I saw another Jira that
stated that a design decision was made that Map dot property getters always
resulted in a map key lookup. For consistency, I think either the same policy
should be applied to Map property setters or the original design decision
should be reconsidered to first check for property existence.
was:
Creating a subclass of java.util.HashMap with properties defined results in
inconsistent and confusing behavior.
{code:groovy}
class MapSub extends HashMap {
def foo
}
// Using dot notation to get the property results in a map key lookup.
def m = new MapSub(foo: 'bar')
println m.foo // prints 'null'
println m.getFoo() // prints 'bar'
// Using same dot notation to set the property results in property setter.
m.foo = 'baz'
println m.foo // still prints 'null'
println m.getFoo() // prints 'baz'
{code}
This behavior results in subtle and hard to track bugs. I saw another Jira that
stated that a design decision was made that Map dot property getters always
resulted in a map key lookup. For consistency, I think either the same policy
should be applied to Map property setters or the original design decision
should be reconsidered to first check for property existence.
> HashMap subclass property access inconsistent
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GROOVY-5491
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-5491
> Project: Groovy
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: groovy-runtime
> Affects Versions: 1.8.6
> Reporter: Michael Collado
> Priority: Minor
>
> Creating a subclass of java.util.HashMap with properties defined results in
> inconsistent and confusing behavior.
> {code:java}
> class MapSub extends HashMap {
> def foo
>
> }
> // Using dot notation to get the property results in a map key lookup.
> def m = new MapSub(foo: 'bar')
> println m.foo // prints 'null'
> println m.getFoo() // prints 'bar'
> // Using same dot notation to set the property results in property setter.
> m.foo = 'baz'
> println m.foo // still prints 'null'
> println m.getFoo() // prints 'baz'
> {code}
> This behavior results in subtle and hard to track bugs. I saw another Jira
> that stated that a design decision was made that Map dot property getters
> always resulted in a map key lookup. For consistency, I think either the same
> policy should be applied to Map property setters or the original design
> decision should be reconsidered to first check for property existence.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
