[bv-dev] Container element validation for arrays

[Gunnar Morling]

2017-04-19 17:38 GMT+02:00 Matt Benson <mbenson at apache.org>:
> My understanding was that using:
>
> @Size(2) String[] arrayOfTwoStrings;
>
> was basically "wrong" according to the new annotation semantics. Rather
> you'd have:
>
> @Size(2) String[] arrayOfTwoCharacterCodes;
> String @Size(2) [] arrayOfTwoStrings;
>
> The "nuclear" option is to adopt this wholeheartedly in BV 2.0. We could
> additionally support a "compatibility mode" that, if enabled, would preserve
> the BV 1.x constrained array semantics, with no Java-based option to
> validate each element  (as the appropriate constraint position has been
> hijacked).

Yes, that would be an option. But the "compatibility mode" would have
to be enabled by default I think. We can experiment with that in the
RI.

> Alternatively, a given BV implementation could support a special
> mode to turn on the "new" behavior, but that would probably be much more
> messy for re-unifying the specification and implementations in the future.
>
> Matt
>
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Michael Nascimento <misterm at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Gunnar Morling <gunnar at hibernate.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Then we cannot tell what's the target of the @Size annotation, String
>>> or String[]. As per Java 8's annotation semantics it can be both
>>> (provided FIELD and TYPE_USE are among the supported element types).
>>
>>
>> This point worries me. So you're saying there's a flaw in *the language
>> design* for this JSR in this particular case, is that right? I said it
>> before, but since now we got to a point you''re stating (maybe rightfully,
>> don't take me wrong!) the language is broken in the specific case of
>> annotations involving arrays, it would be nice to contact the spec leads for
>> the JSR in order to see (a) if we missed something (then we should revisit
>> the solution) or (b) to get the language fixed for Java SE 10 (for 9 I think
>> it wouldn't make it even though it's a bug fix) and in this case provide no
>> support until we release BV for that version of Java.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Michael
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
>> beanvalidation-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> beanvalidation-dev mailing list
> beanvalidation-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev