From: Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel.bernard(a)jboss.com&gt; Date: June 17, 2009 14:41:03 EDT To: Subject: Re: Path, string or object model Here is the solution I cooked. I think it's acceptable but add some complexity in the ConstraintValidatorContext API (see other email). Please review (pay special attention to the examples). A Path represents the path and is the one accepted by the path consuming APIs. A Path is an Iterable of Nodes. /** * Represent a navigation path from an object to another. * Each path element is represented by a Node. * * The path corresponds to the succession of nodes * in the order they are retured by the Iterator * * @author Emmanuel Bernard */ public interface Path extends Iterable<Node> { } A node represent a path element. /** * Represents an element of a navigation path * * @author Emmanuel Bernard */ public interface Node { /** * Property name the node represents * or null if the leaf node and representing an entity * (in particular the node representing the root object * has its name null) */ String getName(); /** * True if the node represents an object contained in an Iterable * or in a Map. */ boolean isInIterable(); /** * The index the node is placed in if contained * in an array or List. Null otherwise. */ Integer getIndex(); /** * The key the node is placed in if contained * in a Map. Null otherwise. */ Object getKey(); } A few interesting points: - the index / key is hosted by the node after the collection node Here are a few examples and their Node equivalent "" 0: Node(name:null, isInIterable:false, index:null, key:null) "email" 0: Node(name:email, isInIterable:false, index:null, key:null) "addresses" 0: Node(name:addresses, isInIterable:false, index:null, key:null) "addresses["home"]" represent the bean level of an Address object 0: Node(name:addresses, isInIterable:false, index:null, key:null) 1: Node(name:null, isInIterable:true, index:null, key:home) "addresses["home"].city" 0: Node(name:addresses, isInIterable:false, index:null, key:null) 1: Node(name:city, isInIterable:true, index:null, key:home) "billingAddresses[3].country.name" 0: Node(name:billingAddresses, isInIterable:false, index:null, key:null) 1: Node(name:country, isInIterable:true, index:3, key:null) 2: Node(name:name, isInIterable:false, index:null, key:null) ConstraintViolation renders a Path public interface ConstraintViolation<T> { Path getPropertyPath(); } TraversableResolver accepts a path public interface TraversableResolver { boolean isReachable(Object traversableObject, String traversableProperty, Class<?> rootBeanType, Path pathToTraversableObject, ElementType elementType); ... } PS: should String traversableProperty be Node traversableProperty ? On May 27, 2009, at 12:19, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: > In several areas we do describe path: > - ConstraintViolation > - ConstraintValidatorContext (with addError(String, String) which > allows to concatenate substrings > > So far we use the notion of string to represent it > - address.name > - cards[3].color > - addresses["home"].city > > I have added the idea of using [] for simple Iterable objects (ie > non indexed, like a Set) > - accounts[].balance > > Anybody objects to that? > > Second point > Do we want to replace this String approach with a path object mode? > > http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/browse/BVAL-143 > ______ > path are today strings with dot separating properties. But it break > when Set or Iterable are used. > We could replace that with > --- First strawman, must evolve -- > class PathElement { > String getName(); > PathElement getParentPath(); > boolean isIterable(); > boolean isIndexed(); > Object getIndex(); > //TODO int getIndex()? > > // not happy about that as it is only useful for > Constraintciolation > PathElement getChild(); > } > > PathElement would be used for Constraintvuilation, maybe CVContext > etc > > can this be refactored using inheritance + generics to have an > IndexedPathElement only when it matters (probably no unfortunately) > ______ > > > Pros: > - less string manipulation by the user and the TraversableResolver > implementation > - the map index no longer rely on "[" + toString() + "]" and is > likely more easily handled > > Cons: > - ConstraintValidatorContext becomes more complex as it needs to > expose some kind of path element builder. > - we would like need to standardize some kind of String > serialization anyway > - I don't see Pros as huge advantages > > WDYT?