I have a relatively simple case, something like this :
public class Foo {
private List<Bar> bars;
public void List<Bar> getBars(){
return this.bars;
}
// I don't want to provide a Bars setter to the outside of my bean
// I only want to create bars from quixes I retrieve from db
public void setQuixes(List<Quix> quixes){
this.bars = convertQuixesToBars(quixes);
}
In my mapping file, I'll have something like this :
<resultMap id="Quix" type="foo.Quix">....</resultMap>
<resultMap id="Foo" type="foo.Foo">
<collection property="quixes" resultMap="Quix" columnPrefix="quixes." />
</resultMap>
When mapping occurs, I catch an exception :
*There is no getter for property named 'quixes' in 'class foo.Foo*
Seems like MyBatis needs a collection getter in order, I suppose, to
successively call add() on it.
I was just wondering : would there be a way to tell Mybatis to create the
collection "externally" and the inject it via the setter method only
(without calling the getQuixes() any time) ?
- Creating a new DAO-layer-dedicated POJO having a List<Quix> inside it,
and converting it to my Foo instance after db retrieval.
Why not but heh, you know it's kinda boring to not forget to make this
POJO evolve every time Foo evolves.
- Creating an ugly Foo subclass having an anonymous ArrayList<Quix>
subclass having the add() method overriden which populate the List<Bar> on
every add.
Note that I _had_ to instantiate this ArrayList in the constructor and
never instantiate it after because MyBatis seems to act "externally" with
collections, like this :
*Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
**List<Quix> quixes = ....
createdFoo.setQuixes(quixes);
createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
*
Instead of acting "on its side" like this :
*Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
List<Quix> quixes = ....
quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
createdFoo.set(quixes);*
> I have a relatively simple case, something like this :
> public class Foo {
> private List<Bar> bars;
> public void List<Bar> getBars(){
> return this.bars;
> }
> // I don't want to provide a Bars setter to the outside of my bean
> // I only want to create bars from quixes I retrieve from db
> public void setQuixes(List<Quix> quixes){
> this.bars = convertQuixesToBars(quixes);
> }
> In my mapping file, I'll have something like this :
> <resultMap id="Quix" type="foo.Quix">....</resultMap>
> <resultMap id="Foo" type="foo.Foo">
> <collection property="quixes" resultMap="Quix" columnPrefix="quixes."
> />
> </resultMap>
> When mapping occurs, I catch an exception :
> *There is no getter for property named 'quixes' in 'class foo.Foo*
> Seems like MyBatis needs a collection getter in order, I suppose, to
> successively call add() on it.
> I was just wondering : would there be a way to tell Mybatis to create the
> collection "externally" and the inject it via the setter method only
> (without calling the getQuixes() any time) ?
As a workaround, you can add a private getter method.
Christian
De : mybatis-user@googlegroups.com [mailto:mybatis-user@googlegroups.com] De la part de Frédéric Camblor
Envoyé : October-17-12 3:22 AM
Ŕ : mybatis-user@googlegroups.com
Objet : Re: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any getter
No advice about this topic ?
FTM, I only found 2 workarounds :
* Creating a new DAO-layer-dedicated POJO having a List<Quix> inside it, and converting it to my Foo instance after db retrieval.
Why not but heh, you know it's kinda boring to not forget to make this POJO evolve every time Foo evolves.
* Creating an ugly Foo subclass having an anonymous ArrayList<Quix> subclass having the add() method overriden which populate the List<Bar> on every add.
Note that I _had_ to instantiate this ArrayList in the constructor and never instantiate it after because MyBatis seems to act "externally" with collections, like this :
Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
List<Quix> quixes = ....
createdFoo.setQuixes(quixes);
createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
Instead of acting "on its side" like this :
Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
List<Quix> quixes = ....
quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
createdFoo.set(quixes);
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Frédéric Camblor <fcamb...@gmail.com<mailto:fcamb...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi folks !
I have a relatively simple case, something like this :
public class Foo {
private List<Bar> bars;
public void List<Bar> getBars(){
return this.bars;
}
// I don't want to provide a Bars setter to the outside of my bean
// I only want to create bars from quixes I retrieve from db
public void setQuixes(List<Quix> quixes){
this.bars = convertQuixesToBars(quixes);
}
In my mapping file, I'll have something like this :
<resultMap id="Quix" type="foo.Quix">....</resultMap>
<resultMap id="Foo" type="foo.Foo">
<collection property="quixes" resultMap="Quix" columnPrefix="quixes." />
</resultMap>
When mapping occurs, I catch an exception :
There is no getter for property named 'quixes' in 'class foo.Foo
Seems like MyBatis needs a collection getter in order, I suppose, to successively call add() on it.
I was just wondering : would there be a way to tell Mybatis to create the collection "externally" and the inject it via the setter method only (without calling the getQuixes() any time) ?
Actually MyBatis can use any private getter/setter.
MyBatis can also handle fields (even private) that have no getter/setter, POJOs for example.
Christian
De : mybatis-user@googlegroups.com [mailto:mybatis-user@googlegroups.com] De la part de Poitras Christian
Envoyé : October-17-12 9:04 AM
Ŕ : 'mybatis-user@googlegroups.com'
Objet : RE: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any getter
Hi,
As a workaround, you can add a private getter method.
Christian
De : mybatis-user@googlegroups.com<mailto:mybatis-user@googlegroups.com> [mailto:mybatis-user@googlegroups.com] De la part de Frédéric Camblor
Envoyé : October-17-12 3:22 AM
Ŕ : mybatis-user@googlegroups.com<mailto:mybatis-user@googlegroups.com>
Objet : Re: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any getter
No advice about this topic ?
FTM, I only found 2 workarounds :
* Creating a new DAO-layer-dedicated POJO having a List<Quix> inside it, and converting it to my Foo instance after db retrieval.
Why not but heh, you know it's kinda boring to not forget to make this POJO evolve every time Foo evolves.
* Creating an ugly Foo subclass having an anonymous ArrayList<Quix> subclass having the add() method overriden which populate the List<Bar> on every add.
Note that I _had_ to instantiate this ArrayList in the constructor and never instantiate it after because MyBatis seems to act "externally" with collections, like this :
Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
List<Quix> quixes = ....
createdFoo.setQuixes(quixes);
createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
Instead of acting "on its side" like this :
Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
List<Quix> quixes = ....
quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
createdFoo.set(quixes);
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Frédéric Camblor <fcamb...@gmail.com<mailto:fcamb...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi folks !
I have a relatively simple case, something like this :
public class Foo {
private List<Bar> bars;
public void List<Bar> getBars(){
return this.bars;
}
// I don't want to provide a Bars setter to the outside of my bean
// I only want to create bars from quixes I retrieve from db
public void setQuixes(List<Quix> quixes){
this.bars = convertQuixesToBars(quixes);
}
In my mapping file, I'll have something like this :
<resultMap id="Quix" type="foo.Quix">....</resultMap>
<resultMap id="Foo" type="foo.Foo">
<collection property="quixes" resultMap="Quix" columnPrefix="quixes." />
</resultMap>
When mapping occurs, I catch an exception :
There is no getter for property named 'quixes' in 'class foo.Foo
Seems like MyBatis needs a collection getter in order, I suppose, to successively call add() on it.
I was just wondering : would there be a way to tell Mybatis to create the collection "externally" and the inject it via the setter method only (without calling the getQuixes() any time) ?
Problem is, as I said in my previous example, it _seems_ that setter is
only used to inject an empty collection, getter is then called to add()
rows on this collection.
=> Going this way, setter won't have the collection filled completely (so I
cannot fill my List<Bar> field in the setter).
Christian.Poit...@ircm.qc.ca> wrote:
> Actually MyBatis can use any private getter/setter.****
> MyBatis can also handle fields (even private) that have no getter/setter,
> POJOs for example.****
> ** **
> Christian****
> ** **
> *De :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com [mailto:mybatis-user@googlegroups.com]
> *De la part de* Poitras Christian
> *Envoyé :* October-17-12 9:04 AM
> *Ŕ :* 'mybatis-user@googlegroups.com'
> *Objet :* RE: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any getter*
> ***
> ** **
> Hi,****
> ** **
> As a workaround, you can add a private getter method.****
> ** **
> Christian****
> ** **
> *De :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com [mailto:mybatis-user@googlegroups.com<mybatis-user@googlegroups.com>]
> *De la part de* Frédéric Camblor
> *Envoyé :* October-17-12 3:22 AM
> *Ŕ :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com
> *Objet :* Re: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any getter*
> ***
> ** **
> No advice about this topic ?****
> ** **
> FTM, I only found 2 workarounds :****
> - Creating a new DAO-layer-dedicated POJO having a List<Quix> inside
> it, and converting it to my Foo instance after db retrieval.
> Why not but heh, you know it's kinda boring to not forget to make this
> POJO evolve every time Foo evolves.****
> - Creating an ugly Foo subclass having an anonymous ArrayList<Quix>
> subclass having the add() method overriden which populate the List<Bar> on
> every add.
> Note that I _had_ to instantiate this ArrayList in the constructor and
> never instantiate it after because MyBatis seems to act "externally" with
> collections, like this :
> *Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
> List<Quix> quixes = ....
> createdFoo.setQuixes(quixes);
> createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
> createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
> *
> Instead of acting "on its side" like this :
> *Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
> List<Quix> quixes = ....
> quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
> quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
> createdFoo.set(quixes);*****
> ** **
> Am I wrong ? (I would love to be wrong ! :-))****
> *There is no getter for property named 'quixes' in 'class foo.Foo*****
> ** **
> Seems like MyBatis needs a collection getter in order, I suppose, to
> successively call add() on it.****
> I was just wondering : would there be a way to tell Mybatis to create the
> collection "externally" and the inject it via the setter method only
> (without calling the getQuixes() any time) ?****
That's correct. This is the way MyBatis works - it processes the result
set row by row and does not build any "side" collections.
We've always said that the best way to keep out of trouble is to make your
MyBatis objects very simple POJOs - as simple as possible. This can,
unfortunately, lead to an AnemicDomainModel antipattern, but it is the way
MyBatis works and it would be difficult to change.
If you want a rich model, it is best to have some kind of translate layer
between MyBatis POJOs and your rich model.
Jeff Butler
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Frédéric Camblor <fcamb...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Problem is, as I said in my previous example, it _seems_ that setter is
> only used to inject an empty collection, getter is then called to add()
> rows on this collection.
> => Going this way, setter won't have the collection filled completely (so
> I cannot fill my List<Bar> field in the setter).
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Poitras Christian <
> Christian.Poit...@ircm.qc.ca> wrote:
>> Actually MyBatis can use any private getter/setter.****
>> MyBatis can also handle fields (even private) that have no getter/setter,
>> POJOs for example.****
>> ** **
>> Christian****
>> ** **
>> *De :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com [mailto:
>> mybatis-user@googlegroups.com] *De la part de* Poitras Christian
>> *Envoyé :* October-17-12 9:04 AM
>> *Ŕ :* 'mybatis-user@googlegroups.com'
>> *Objet :* RE: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any getter
>> ****
>> ** **
>> Hi,****
>> ** **
>> As a workaround, you can add a private getter method.****
>> ** **
>> Christian****
>> ** **
>> *De :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com [
>> mailto:mybatis-user@googlegroups.com <mybatis-user@googlegroups.com>] *De
>> la part de* Frédéric Camblor
>> *Envoyé :* October-17-12 3:22 AM
>> *Ŕ :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com
>> *Objet :* Re: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any getter
>> ****
>> ** **
>> No advice about this topic ?****
>> ** **
>> FTM, I only found 2 workarounds :****
>> - Creating a new DAO-layer-dedicated POJO having a List<Quix> inside
>> it, and converting it to my Foo instance after db retrieval.
>> Why not but heh, you know it's kinda boring to not forget to make
>> this POJO evolve every time Foo evolves.****
>> - Creating an ugly Foo subclass having an anonymous ArrayList<Quix>
>> subclass having the add() method overriden which populate the List<Bar> on
>> every add.
>> Note that I _had_ to instantiate this ArrayList in the constructor
>> and never instantiate it after because MyBatis seems to act "externally"
>> with collections, like this :
>> *Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
>> List<Quix> quixes = ....
>> createdFoo.setQuixes(quixes);
>> createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
>> createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
>> *
>> Instead of acting "on its side" like this :
>> *Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
>> List<Quix> quixes = ....
>> quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
>> quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
>> createdFoo.set(quixes);*****
>> ** **
>> Am I wrong ? (I would love to be wrong ! :-))****
>> When mapping occurs, I catch an exception :****
>> *There is no getter for property named 'quixes' in 'class foo.Foo*****
>> ** **
>> Seems like MyBatis needs a collection getter in order, I suppose, to
>> successively call add() on it.****
>> I was just wondering : would there be a way to tell Mybatis to create the
>> collection "externally" and the inject it via the setter method only
>> (without calling the getQuixes() any time) ?****
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Jeff Butler <jeffgbut...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's correct. This is the way MyBatis works - it processes the result
> set row by row and does not build any "side" collections.
> We've always said that the best way to keep out of trouble is to make your
> MyBatis objects very simple POJOs - as simple as possible. This can,
> unfortunately, lead to an AnemicDomainModel antipattern, but it is the way
> MyBatis works and it would be difficult to change.
> If you want a rich model, it is best to have some kind of translate layer
> between MyBatis POJOs and your rich model.
> Jeff Butler
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Frédéric Camblor <fcamb...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> Yup I already tried adding a private getter.
>> Problem is, as I said in my previous example, it _seems_ that setter is
>> only used to inject an empty collection, getter is then called to add()
>> rows on this collection.
>> => Going this way, setter won't have the collection filled completely (so
>> I cannot fill my List<Bar> field in the setter).
>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Poitras Christian <
>> Christian.Poit...@ircm.qc.ca> wrote:
>>> Actually MyBatis can use any private getter/setter.****
>>> MyBatis can also handle fields (even private) that have no
>>> getter/setter, POJOs for example.****
>>> ** **
>>> Christian****
>>> ** **
>>> *De :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com [mailto:
>>> mybatis-user@googlegroups.com] *De la part de* Poitras Christian
>>> *Envoyé :* October-17-12 9:04 AM
>>> *Ŕ :* 'mybatis-user@googlegroups.com'
>>> *Objet :* RE: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any
>>> getter****
>>> ** **
>>> Hi,****
>>> ** **
>>> As a workaround, you can add a private getter method.****
>>> ** **
>>> Christian****
>>> ** **
>>> *De :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com [
>>> mailto:mybatis-user@googlegroups.com <mybatis-user@googlegroups.com>] *De
>>> la part de* Frédéric Camblor
>>> *Envoyé :* October-17-12 3:22 AM
>>> *Ŕ :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com
>>> *Objet :* Re: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any
>>> getter****
>>> ** **
>>> No advice about this topic ?****
>>> ** **
>>> FTM, I only found 2 workarounds :****
>>> - Creating a new DAO-layer-dedicated POJO having a List<Quix> inside
>>> it, and converting it to my Foo instance after db retrieval.
>>> Why not but heh, you know it's kinda boring to not forget to make
>>> this POJO evolve every time Foo evolves.****
>>> - Creating an ugly Foo subclass having an anonymous ArrayList<Quix>
>>> subclass having the add() method overriden which populate the List<Bar> on
>>> every add.
>>> Note that I _had_ to instantiate this ArrayList in the constructor
>>> and never instantiate it after because MyBatis seems to act "externally"
>>> with collections, like this :
>>> *Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
>>> List<Quix> quixes = ....
>>> createdFoo.setQuixes(quixes);
>>> createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
>>> createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
>>> *
>>> Instead of acting "on its side" like this :
>>> *Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
>>> List<Quix> quixes = ....
>>> quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
>>> quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
>>> createdFoo.set(quixes);*****
>>> ** **
>>> Am I wrong ? (I would love to be wrong ! :-))****
>>> When mapping occurs, I catch an exception :****
>>> *There is no getter for property named 'quixes' in 'class foo.Foo*****
>>> ** **
>>> Seems like MyBatis needs a collection getter in order, I suppose, to
>>> successively call add() on it.****
>>> I was just wondering : would there be a way to tell Mybatis to create
>>> the collection "externally" and the inject it via the setter method only
>>> (without calling the getQuixes() any time) ?****
@Jeff Ok I understand completely the anemic domain model way of thinking,
and I agree changing current MyBatis behaviour on Collections would be
harmful (especially for backward compat).
But I don't really catch why "external add" was made instead of building a
side collection and injecting it in the end.
It seems really _unnatural_ behaviour compared to other introspection
oriented frameworks (such as spring, jackson, hibernate and so on...)
I'll live with this thought.
@Frank ResultHandler will surely help to remove my ugly ArrayList.add()
overriding behaviour in my collection, it's a good point.
Nevertheless it won't solve the problem (I'll still have to live with a
mybatis-specific model in that case).
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Jeff Butler <jeffgbut...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> That's correct. This is the way MyBatis works - it processes the result
>> set row by row and does not build any "side" collections.
>> We've always said that the best way to keep out of trouble is to make
>> your MyBatis objects very simple POJOs - as simple as possible. This can,
>> unfortunately, lead to an AnemicDomainModel antipattern, but it is the way
>> MyBatis works and it would be difficult to change.
>> If you want a rich model, it is best to have some kind of translate layer
>> between MyBatis POJOs and your rich model.
>> Jeff Butler
>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Frédéric Camblor <fcamb...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Yup I already tried adding a private getter.
>>> Problem is, as I said in my previous example, it _seems_ that setter is
>>> only used to inject an empty collection, getter is then called to add()
>>> rows on this collection.
>>> => Going this way, setter won't have the collection filled completely
>>> (so I cannot fill my List<Bar> field in the setter).
>>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Poitras Christian <
>>> Christian.Poit...@ircm.qc.ca> wrote:
>>>> Actually MyBatis can use any private getter/setter.****
>>>> MyBatis can also handle fields (even private) that have no
>>>> getter/setter, POJOs for example.****
>>>> ** **
>>>> Christian****
>>>> ** **
>>>> *De :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com [mailto:
>>>> mybatis-user@googlegroups.com] *De la part de* Poitras Christian
>>>> *Envoyé :* October-17-12 9:04 AM
>>>> *Ŕ :* 'mybatis-user@googlegroups.com'
>>>> *Objet :* RE: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any
>>>> getter****
>>>> ** **
>>>> Hi,****
>>>> ** **
>>>> As a workaround, you can add a private getter method.****
>>>> ** **
>>>> Christian****
>>>> ** **
>>>> *De :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com [
>>>> mailto:mybatis-user@googlegroups.com <mybatis-user@googlegroups.com>] *De
>>>> la part de* Frédéric Camblor
>>>> *Envoyé :* October-17-12 3:22 AM
>>>> *Ŕ :* mybatis-user@googlegroups.com
>>>> *Objet :* Re: ResultMaps : Injecting collection without having any
>>>> getter****
>>>> ** **
>>>> No advice about this topic ?****
>>>> ** **
>>>> FTM, I only found 2 workarounds :****
>>>> - Creating a new DAO-layer-dedicated POJO having a List<Quix>
>>>> inside it, and converting it to my Foo instance after db retrieval.
>>>> Why not but heh, you know it's kinda boring to not forget to make
>>>> this POJO evolve every time Foo evolves.****
>>>> - Creating an ugly Foo subclass having an anonymous ArrayList<Quix>
>>>> subclass having the add() method overriden which populate the List<Bar> on
>>>> every add.
>>>> Note that I _had_ to instantiate this ArrayList in the constructor
>>>> and never instantiate it after because MyBatis seems to act "externally"
>>>> with collections, like this :
>>>> *Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
>>>> List<Quix> quixes = ....
>>>> createdFoo.setQuixes(quixes);
>>>> createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
>>>> createdFoo.getQuixes().add(convertRowToQuix());
>>>> *
>>>> Instead of acting "on its side" like this :
>>>> *Foo createdFoo = new Foo();
>>>> List<Quix> quixes = ....
>>>> quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
>>>> quixes.add(convertRowToQuix());
>>>> createdFoo.set(quixes);*****
>>>> ** **
>>>> Am I wrong ? (I would love to be wrong ! :-))****
>>>> When mapping occurs, I catch an exception :****
>>>> *There is no getter for property named 'quixes' in 'class foo.Foo*****
>>>> ** **
>>>> Seems like MyBatis needs a collection getter in order, I suppose, to
>>>> successively call add() on it.****
>>>> I was just wondering : would there be a way to tell Mybatis to create
>>>> the collection "externally" and the inject it via the setter method only
>>>> (without calling the getQuixes() any time) ?****
"I understand completely the anemic domain model way of thinking".
ROFL. Never thought I'd hear that sound-bite again.
I thought the SpringSource consultancy were about the only people promoting
the Rich Domain Model 'pattern', and that was about 6 years ago. I've seen
it in practice a couple of times, and it's not very pretty.
The thing about spaghetti is - try as you may to slurp it up, in a genteel
manner. There's always that rogue strand which escapes the fork/spoon
combination and ruins a perfectly good shirt.
Anaemic Domain Model, anti-pattern. Hmm, not sure I'd call it an
anti-pattern. Call it logical separation of concern.
Uh ? What the point here ?
Where did I speak about anemic domain "anti pattern" ?
I'm using anemic POJO currently but heh, you never had any calculated field
in your anemic POJOs ?
I mean... something like this :
public class AnAnemicPOJO {
private String field1, field2, field3, field4, ......;
private List<Foo> foos;
private Map<String, Foo> foosByName = new HashMap<>();
/* here a bunch of getters/setters for fieldX and foos */
// A particular case...
public void setFoos(List<Foo> foos){
this.foos.addAll(foos);
for(Foo f: foos){
this.foosByName.put(f.getName(), f);
}
}
public Foo getFoo(String name){
// Will avoid iterating over the complete list which could be very
long in some cases...
return foosByName.get(name);
}
}
Don't you call this an anemic model ?
To my POV, this is an anemic model _even if_ there is a bit of code inside
it (but heh, that's not business code... just code to speed things up).
So, if your position is to say that I should have 2 models, duplicating
every "fieldX" fields, in respect to "separation of concerns", I personally
find it overkill and unmaintainable on the long term (because I'll have to
bind every field somewhere, and ensure when I add a new field, I don't miss
to bind it)
But once again, I'll live with it since I love philosophy of MyBatis.
> "I understand completely the anemic domain model way of thinking".
> ROFL. Never thought I'd hear that sound-bite again.
> I thought the SpringSource consultancy were about the only people
> promoting the Rich Domain Model 'pattern', and that was about 6 years ago.
> I've seen it in practice a couple of times, and it's not very pretty.
> The thing about spaghetti is - try as you may to slurp it up, in a genteel
> manner. There's always that rogue strand which escapes the fork/spoon
> combination and ruins a perfectly good shirt.
> Anaemic Domain Model, anti-pattern. Hmm, not sure I'd call it an
> anti-pattern. Call it logical separation of concern.
> public Foo getFoo(String name){
> // Will avoid iterating over the complete list which could be very long in some cases...
> return foosByName.get(name);
> }
> }
> Don't you call this an anemic model ?
> To my POV, this is an anemic model _even if_ there is a bit of code inside it (but heh, that's not business code... just code to speed things up).
> So, if your position is to say that I should have 2 models, duplicating every "fieldX" fields, in respect to "separation of concerns", I personally find it overkill and unmaintainable on the long term (because I'll have to bind every field somewhere, and ensure when I add a new field, I don't miss to bind it)
> But once again, I'll live with it since I love philosophy of MyBatis.
> Frédéric Camblor
> Bordeaux JUG Board member
> Jenkins community member & plugin commiter
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:02 PM, bryan hunt <sentimental.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "I understand completely the anemic domain model way of thinking".
>> ROFL. Never thought I'd hear that sound-bite again.
>> I thought the SpringSource consultancy were about the only people promoting the Rich Domain Model 'pattern', and that was about 6 years ago. I've seen it in practice a couple of times, and it's not very pretty.
>> The thing about spaghetti is - try as you may to slurp it up, in a genteel manner. There's always that rogue strand which escapes the fork/spoon combination and ruins a perfectly good shirt.
>> Anaemic Domain Model, anti-pattern. Hmm, not sure I'd call it an anti-pattern. Call it logical separation of concern.
My problem has nothing to do with visibility (or maybe I don't catch your
point, if so, could you elaborate ?).
Problem is due to collections "injected" by MyBatis : they are *always*
empty when passed to the setter.
MyBatis will fille them _after calling the setter_, by calling
getFoos().add(_internallyMapRowToFoo(currentRow));
> > public Foo getFoo(String name){
> > // Will avoid iterating over the complete list which could be
> very long in some cases...
> > return foosByName.get(name);
> > }
> > }
> > Don't you call this an anemic model ?
> > To my POV, this is an anemic model _even if_ there is a bit of code
> inside it (but heh, that's not business code... just code to speed things
> up).
> > So, if your position is to say that I should have 2 models, duplicating
> every "fieldX" fields, in respect to "separation of concerns", I personally
> find it overkill and unmaintainable on the long term (because I'll have to
> bind every field somewhere, and ensure when I add a new field, I don't miss
> to bind it)
> > But once again, I'll live with it since I love philosophy of MyBatis.
> > Frédéric Camblor
> > Bordeaux JUG Board member
> > Jenkins community member & plugin commiter
> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:02 PM, bryan hunt <sentimental.br...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> "I understand completely the anemic domain model way of thinking".
> >> ROFL. Never thought I'd hear that sound-bite again.
> >> I thought the SpringSource consultancy were about the only people
> promoting the Rich Domain Model 'pattern', and that was about 6 years ago.
> I've seen it in practice a couple of times, and it's not very pretty.
> >> The thing about spaghetti is - try as you may to slurp it up, in a
> genteel manner. There's always that rogue strand which escapes the
> fork/spoon combination and ruins a perfectly good shirt.
> >> Anaemic Domain Model, anti-pattern. Hmm, not sure I'd call it an
> anti-pattern. Call it logical separation of concern.
You could have a default visibility pair of getter/setter that would
_bypass_ your regular public getter/setter which have logic inside.
///
public List<?> getRegular() {
// the implementation you seek
}
public void setRegular(List<?>) {
// the implementation you seek
}
List<?> getShortcut() {
// return the instance MB will add into
}
void setShortcut(List<?>) {
// get the instance MB will populate
// initialize stuff
// maybe add a decorator to the MB list
}
///
If you decorate the list MB will set, you can enhance its behaviour (for
instance update foosByName when an element is added).
You could then _expose the public API as intended_, and have some
"invisible" API that should _only be used by trusted parties_ like MyBatis
and unit tests. A bit boilerplate-ish but feasible.
Dridi
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Frédéric Camblor <fcamb...@gmail.com>wrote:
> My problem has nothing to do with visibility (or maybe I don't catch your
> point, if so, could you elaborate ?).
> Problem is due to collections "injected" by MyBatis : they are *always*
> empty when passed to the setter.
> MyBatis will fille them _after calling the setter_, by calling
> getFoos().add(_internallyMapRowToFoo(currentRow));
>> > public Foo getFoo(String name){
>> > // Will avoid iterating over the complete list which could be
>> very long in some cases...
>> > return foosByName.get(name);
>> > }
>> > }
>> > Don't you call this an anemic model ?
>> > To my POV, this is an anemic model _even if_ there is a bit of code
>> inside it (but heh, that's not business code... just code to speed things
>> up).
>> > So, if your position is to say that I should have 2 models, duplicating
>> every "fieldX" fields, in respect to "separation of concerns", I personally
>> find it overkill and unmaintainable on the long term (because I'll have to
>> bind every field somewhere, and ensure when I add a new field, I don't miss
>> to bind it)
>> > But once again, I'll live with it since I love philosophy of MyBatis.
>> > Frédéric Camblor
>> > Bordeaux JUG Board member
>> > Jenkins community member & plugin commiter
>> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:02 PM, bryan hunt <
>> sentimental.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> "I understand completely the anemic domain model way of thinking".
>> >> ROFL. Never thought I'd hear that sound-bite again.
>> >> I thought the SpringSource consultancy were about the only people
>> promoting the Rich Domain Model 'pattern', and that was about 6 years ago.
>> I've seen it in practice a couple of times, and it's not very pretty.
>> >> The thing about spaghetti is - try as you may to slurp it up, in a
>> genteel manner. There's always that rogue strand which escapes the
>> fork/spoon combination and ruins a perfectly good shirt.
>> >> Anaemic Domain Model, anti-pattern. Hmm, not sure I'd call it an
>> anti-pattern. Call it logical separation of concern.
dridi.boukelmo...@zenika.com> wrote:
> You could have a default visibility pair of getter/setter that would
> _bypass_ your regular public getter/setter which have logic inside.
> ///
> public List<?> getRegular() {
> // the implementation you seek
> }
> public void setRegular(List<?>) {
> // the implementation you seek
> }
> List<?> getShortcut() {
> // return the instance MB will add into
> }
> void setShortcut(List<?>) {
> // get the instance MB will populate
> // initialize stuff
> // maybe add a decorator to the MB list
> }
> ///
> If you decorate the list MB will set, you can enhance its behaviour (for
> instance update foosByName when an element is added).
> You could then _expose the public API as intended_, and have some
> "invisible" API that should _only be used by trusted parties_ like MyBatis
> and unit tests. A bit boilerplate-ish but feasible.
> Dridi
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Frédéric Camblor <fcamb...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> Hi Dridi,
>> My problem has nothing to do with visibility (or maybe I don't catch your
>> point, if so, could you elaborate ?).
>> Problem is due to collections "injected" by MyBatis : they are *always*
>> empty when passed to the setter.
>> MyBatis will fille them _after calling the setter_, by calling
>> getFoos().add(_internallyMapRowToFoo(currentRow));
>>> > public Foo getFoo(String name){
>>> > // Will avoid iterating over the complete list which could be
>>> very long in some cases...
>>> > return foosByName.get(name);
>>> > }
>>> > }
>>> > Don't you call this an anemic model ?
>>> > To my POV, this is an anemic model _even if_ there is a bit of code
>>> inside it (but heh, that's not business code... just code to speed things
>>> up).
>>> > So, if your position is to say that I should have 2 models,
>>> duplicating every "fieldX" fields, in respect to "separation of concerns",
>>> I personally find it overkill and unmaintainable on the long term (because
>>> I'll have to bind every field somewhere, and ensure when I add a new field,
>>> I don't miss to bind it)
>>> > But once again, I'll live with it since I love philosophy of MyBatis.
>>> > Frédéric Camblor
>>> > Bordeaux JUG Board member
>>> > Jenkins community member & plugin commiter
>>> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:02 PM, bryan hunt <
>>> sentimental.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> "I understand completely the anemic domain model way of thinking".
>>> >> ROFL. Never thought I'd hear that sound-bite again.
>>> >> I thought the SpringSource consultancy were about the only people
>>> promoting the Rich Domain Model 'pattern', and that was about 6 years ago.
>>> I've seen it in practice a couple of times, and it's not very pretty.
>>> >> The thing about spaghetti is - try as you may to slurp it up, in a
>>> genteel manner. There's always that rogue strand which escapes the
>>> fork/spoon combination and ruins a perfectly good shirt.
>>> >> Anaemic Domain Model, anti-pattern. Hmm, not sure I'd call it an
>>> anti-pattern. Call it logical separation of concern.
