Gunnar Morling commented on New Feature HV-467

Is there something which needs to be discussed with the EG?

I'm not sure, so far nothing is said about group sequence re-definitions with respect to method validation in the spec. I think some more clarification is needed here.

Maybe we could start to define a couple of unit tests and see what happens. This would help to nail down the expectations for group sequence re-definitions and method validation.

+1. Actually this group sequence re-definition thing is the part of the spec I'm having the hardest time with. In particular the behavior with re-defined sequences in sub-types. Writing tests is a good idea.

Group sequence re-definition really only occurs for cascaded parameters/return values, right?

Does it? I think also constraints directly assigned to a parameter/return value could be put into a group and thus be subject to a re-defined default group sequence, e.g.:

@GroupSequence({SomeGroup.class, Foo.class})
public class Foo {

    void bar(@NotNull(groups=SomeGroup.class} bar) { ... }

    void baz(@NotNull(groups=OtherGroup.class} baz) { ... }
}

Here I think only the constraint at the bar() method should be evaluated when performing a method validation for the default group.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira