Hi Francesco
Sure, you can try:
@PUT
@Consumes({ MediaType.APPLICATION_XML, MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON })
void update(@NotNull ResourceTO resourceTO);
Omitting the extra @Path completely and getting the key out of
ResourceTo bean:
PUT /resources
<Resource>
<key>1</key>
<!- the rest of the representation -->
</Resource>
given that the key is available there.
That said, if we were to abstract away from the the redundant proxy code
where the key is specified twice during the invocation, one can say PUT
targets an individual resource representation which is indeed identified
as /resources/{key}. Optimizing the {key} away would lead to a slightly
unbalanced space:
// GET the 1st resource
GET /resources/1
// Update the 1st resource
PUT /resources
(the representation with the key)
My opinion has always been that ultimately the more practical it is the
better as opposed to the purer the better. It might be reasonable to
support both styles:
PUT /resources/1
POST /resources
as POST is usually deals with the collection of resources and I guess it
may be reasonable to suggest that POSTing to a collection which already
contains an element with the same key means the actual update.
It can become complex trying to figure out the perfect combination :-)
Cheers, Sergey
On 08/06/15 07:05, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote:
Hi,
we have several "update" methods in our JAX-RS services, with similar
signature:
@PUT
@Path("{key}")
@Consumes({ MediaType.APPLICATION_XML, MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON })
void update(@NotNull @PathParam("key") String key, @NotNull
ResourceTO resourceTO);
For various reasons, the key value is already contained in the
ResourceTO bean; this leads to kind of redundant invocations like as
resourceService.update(resourceTO.getKey(), resourceTO);
I was wondering whether this situation can be improved by using @BeanParam:
void update(@BeanParam ResourceTO resourceTO);
by annotating ResourceTO#setKey() with @Path("{key}").
It seems that with such setup only "key" is evaluated, e.g. the rest of
ResourceTO instance is left empty.
Am I missing something? Any suggestion to fix the original problem?
Thanks for your support.
Regards.
--
Sergey Beryozkin
Talend Community Coders
http://coders.talend.com/
Blog: http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com
