[bv-dev] Method constraints and TraversableResolver contract

[Hardy Ferentschik]

Hi,

Do you really want to call isReachable/isCascadable for the return value and the actual parameters.
What would be the traversableObject in this case? null?

Let's have a look at a concrete example - TraversableResolverTest from the TCK

This is the existing test (ignoring for a second that is makes use of the toString representation of pathToTraversableObject which needs to be changed):
https://github.com/hferentschik/beanvalidation-tck/blob/HV-673/tests/src/main/java/org/hibernate/beanvalidation/tck/tests/traversableresolver/TraversableResolverTest.java#L66

Now adding a test for parameter and return value validation could look like this:
https://github.com/hferentschik/beanvalidation-tck/blob/HV-673/tests/src/main/java/org/hibernate/beanvalidation/tck/tests/traversableresolver/TraversableResolverTest.java#L101
https://github.com/hferentschik/beanvalidation-tck/blob/HV-673/tests/src/main/java/org/hibernate/beanvalidation/tck/tests/traversableresolver/TraversableResolverTest.java#L144

IMO the actual number of calls to isReachable and isCascadable is the same. But if I understand your previous mail correctly you expect actual calls for the method parameter and
return value itself. Or is there a misunderstanding?

--Hardy

On 10 Jan 2013, at 1:13 PM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel at hibernate.org> wrote:

> Damn it. I changed my mind and thought while writing the email. Forget anything after my signature on the last post. 
> Your example is what I had in mind indeed. 
> 
> On 10 janv. 2013, at 10:30, Gunnar Morling <gunnar at hibernate.org> wrote:
> 
>> I've created https://hibernate.onjira.com/browse/BVAL-357
>> 
>> > I think you should call isReachable and isCascadable for params and return values.
>> 
>> > Of the top of my head I cannot think of a reason why we would need to use isReachable on a parameter
>> 
>> So do you think isReachable() *is* required or not? Regarding your entity example, did you mean it like this:
>> 
>> @Entity
>> public class Customer {}
>> 
>> public class CustomerService {
>>     public void updateCustomer(@RetailCustomer @Valid Customer customer) {
>>     }
>> }
>> 
>> Then I guess it would indeed make sense to call isReachable() and isCascadable() when validating the "customer" parameter.
>> 
>> --Gunnar
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2013/1/10 Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel at hibernate.org>
>> That's an interesting question. I think you should call isReachable and isCascadable for params and return values.
>> Imagine a constraint validating a JPA entity. You don't want it to be validated if the entity is a proxy. This constraint could access a few of the entity state properties. And that's before cascading.
>> 
>> isCascadable was a contract added specifically so that the same entity would not be validated over and over if it happened to be referenced by several other entities in a dirty persistence context.
>> 
>> Open an issue because we need to clarify all that in the spec.
>> 
>> Emmanuel
>> 
>> Of the top of my head I cannot think of a reason why we would need to use isReachable on a parameter
>> 
>> On 9 janv. 2013, at 15:42, Gunnar Morling <gunnar at hibernate.org> wrote:
>> 
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > working on the TCK, I'm wondering whether a BV provider should use TraversableResolver#isReachable() and isCascadable()) to check whether a validated method parameter or return value may be accessed/traversed.
>> >
>> > I think checking for cascadability might make sense, but I'm not so sure about checking for reachability; can e.g. be a parameter not reachable?
>> >
>> > If any of the checks shall be done for method validation, we need to update the TraversableResolver contract (section 4.6.3) which currently explicitly speaks about properties and is limited to the element types FIELD and METHOD.
>> >
>> > WDYT?
>> >
>> > --Gunnar
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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