[bv-dev] Question on Formal Group Definitions rules

[Matt Benson]

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 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Matt,
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:46 AM, Matt Benson <mbenson at 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 at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/beanvalidation-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/beanvalidation-dev/attachments/20180411/81e87a28/attachment.html