Re: [bv-dev] Question on Formal Group Definitions rules
Again, I think the problem is that I simply can't see what in the spec
dictates that, and in what order, an overridden Default sequence from a
superclass should be inherited for sequential validation by the child. The
rules simply say for class X with no group sequence, that its default
constraints include all those of the Default group of superclass Y. Where
is it dictated that Y's sequence be respected?
Thanks,
Matt
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 10:19 AM Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Matt,
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:46 AM, Matt Benson <mbenson(a)apache.org> wrote:
> The assertions of the test, however, expect only the first two. Why is A
omitted? If the sequence defined by a superclass to be respected, where is
this specified? TBH I would think it would make sense, but my read of this
section specifically set me down a path of removing this behavior from the
Apache BVal codebase as I couldn't find a justification for it.
Isn't it because it's a group sequence? So as long as a constraint of the
Minimal group fails, the ones from the group A are not checked.
As you can see in the following assertions, when size is valid, name is
checked.
AFAICS, it's the behavior I would expect but maybe I'm missing something?
--
Guillaume
_______________________________________________
beanvalidation-dev mailing list
beanvalidation-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 2.2 KB)