Allow using `@JsonPropertyOrder` with any-property (`@JsonAnyGetter`) #4396

JooHyukKim · 2024-02-22T00:13:26Z

(For after Property Introspection Rewrite)

This PR resolves...

1.. #4388
2.. part of #2592
- AnyGetter with JsonInclude + JsonFilter combo

Modifications

This PR basically...

Starts to handle Any-Getter property as regular property (for serialization only).
Makes AnyGetterWriter extend BeanPropertyWriter.

notes

If and only if direction is not off.... will clean up and refactor. Solution currently seems a bit of refactoring.
This might allow "ordering" and "ignoring" within AnyGetter prop (I haven't found time to check yet tho)
Change might be to big that maybe

cowtowncoder · 2024-02-23T17:02:16Z

One quick note: I think ordering within "any-getter" group can be out of scope as users can use specific Maps to enforce iteration order, and since it is probably more important to be able to locate group itself.
But I think that's what is being done here, just mentioning it.

Otherwise, I'll have to read this couple of times. I guess it would make sense to try to make any-getter placeholder work similar to "simple" properties, so sorting works. But I wonder if there are complications wrt attempts to link/unlink, as well as ignoral. This because formerly "name" of any-getter hasn't had any effect and could not have accidentally ignored (for example) by a regular property with same name having @JsonIgnore.

JooHyukKim · 2024-02-24T14:13:15Z

But I wonder if there are complications wrt attempts to link/unlink, as well as ignoral. This because formerly "name" of any-getter hasn't had any effect and could not have accidentally ignored (for example) by a regular property with same name having @JsonIgnore.

Valid point with respect to @JsonIgnore and stuff, so I added tests...

On working @JsonIgnore and @JsonIgnoreProperties via 78eb9d5.
On @JsonPropertyOrder explicitly on any-getter property works via 8305a0b

Could you explain a bit more on link/unlink?

cowtowncoder · 2024-02-26T19:49:07Z

Link/unlink: different getter/setter methods, fields, get "linked" if they have same logical name, either implicit (default) or explicit (rename), into a single logical property.
So if such name that an any-getter happens to have matches a regular property, regular property might be annotated with @JsonIgnore (or maybe any-getter) -- and so the whole property is ignored (none of accessors used).

So all I am wondering is if there was a case like:

class Stuff {
  @JsonAnyGetter
  Map<String, Object> metadata;

  @JsonIgnore
  public String getMetadata() { // unrelated to any-setter
     ...
  }
}

where any-setter would be ignored due to name match. Or something similar related to accidentally matching names.

JooHyukKim · 2024-02-27T00:16:12Z

Fortunately, seems to work wrt link/unlink-ed properties 👍🏼. Added more tests via 85ae52e.

cowtowncoder · 2024-03-01T18:51:19Z

src/main/java/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/ser/std/BeanSerializerBase.java

+        for (int i = 0; i < _props.length; i++) {
+            BeanPropertyWriter prop = _props[i];
+            if (prop instanceof AnyGetterWriter) {
+                ((AnyGetterWriter) prop).resolve(provider);


Why doe we need this, when there's resolution right after? Or conversely, is the resolve call below needed at all?

You are right, _anyGetterWriter is no longer needed. Removed _anyGetterWriter entirely 👍🏼

JooHyukKim · 2024-03-03T06:44:00Z

src/main/java/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/ser/std/BeanSerializerBase.java

+        for (int i = 0; i < _props.length; i++) {
+            BeanPropertyWriter prop = _props[i];
+            if (prop instanceof AnyGetterWriter) {
+                ((AnyGetterWriter) prop).resolve(provider);


You are right, _anyGetterWriter is no longer needed. Removed _anyGetterWriter entirely 👍🏼

JooHyukKim · 2024-03-03T06:45:28Z

src/test/java/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/ser/JsonPropertyOrderWithAnyGetter4388Test.java

+    @Test
+    public void testPrivateAnyGetter() throws Exception {
+        PrivateAnyGetterPojo pojo = new PrivateAnyGetterPojo();
+        pojo.add("secondProperty", 2);
+        String json = MAPPER.writeValueAsString(pojo);
+
+        assertEquals(a2q("{" +
+                "'firstProperty':1," +
+                "'thirdProperty':3," +
+                "'forthProperty':4," +
+                "'secondProperty':2}"), // private accesor, wont' work here
+            json);
+    }


Here we have test case where any-getter is private without proper getter to be detected for sorting, so "secondProperty" field will be appended in the end.

JooHyukKim · 2024-03-03T06:53:53Z

src/main/java/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/ser/BeanSerializerFactory.java

@@ -457,7 +453,31 @@ protected JsonSerializer<Object> constructBeanOrAddOnSerializer(SerializerProvid
            PropertyName name = PropertyName.construct(anyGetter.getName());
            BeanProperty.Std anyProp = new BeanProperty.Std(name, valueType, null,
                    anyGetter, PropertyMetadata.STD_OPTIONAL);
-            builder.setAnyGetter(new AnyGetterWriter(anyProp, anyGetter, anySer));
+


Since we are now handling props to either replace or add any-getter, I was thinking maybe instead of....

if (anyGetter != null) { // 40+ lines of code // many more }

... this, we can do... ..

if (anyGetter != null) { props = updateAnyGetterProp(props); }

... like this way, simliar to collectAll() from POJOPropertiesCollector class (Or maybe I am thinking too far at this point 🤔

JooHyukKim · 2024-03-03T06:54:19Z

src/main/java/com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/ser/impl/SimpleBeanPropertyFilter.java

@@ -218,6 +218,8 @@ public void serializeAsField(Object pojo, JsonGenerator jgen,
            writer.serializeAsField(pojo, jgen, provider);
        } else if (!jgen.canOmitFields()) { // since 2.3
            writer.serializeAsOmittedField(pojo, jgen, provider);
+        } else if (writer instanceof AnyGetterWriter) {


WIP : Contemplating on how should we optimize this check...

…bind into fix-4388

JooHyukKim and others added 7 commits February 19, 2024 12:39

Add test

e6663b7

Clean up test utils

7ebe9be

Rename test to include issue related

ef1c377

Change test to show how "Any properties" are not ordered as expected.

7d86a09

Implement @JsonProperyOrder fixer

299d2c7

Merge branch '2.17' into fix-4388

f726a18

Merge branch '2.17' into fix-4388

e52172d

JooHyukKim added 2 commits February 24, 2024 22:53

Add test wrt @JsonIgnore and @JsonIgnoreProperties

78eb9d5

Add test wrt @JsonPropertyOrder

8305a0b

JooHyukKim added 2 commits February 27, 2024 09:15

Add test with link/unlink property

85ae52e

Merge branch '2.17' into fix-4388

9f45a1b

Merge branch '2.17' into fix-4388

5f670e0

cowtowncoder reviewed Mar 1, 2024

View reviewed changes

JooHyukKim added 7 commits March 2, 2024 23:35

Add more tests

483704b

Remove _anyGetterWriter entirely

9f76adb

Apply filter functionality

595658c

Add tests

76255f7

Simplify logic

06e6975

Modify test name

6f7ac85

Clean up

990395d

JooHyukKim commented Mar 3, 2024

View reviewed changes

JooHyukKim added 3 commits March 3, 2024 15:56

Merge branch '2.17' into fix-4388

f2432b0

Add more comment

c243f73

Merge branch 'fix-4388' of https://github.com/JooHyukKim/jackson-data…

f1fbff3

…bind into fix-4388

This was referenced Mar 4, 2024

@JsonPropertyOrder(alphabetic = true) does not include @JsonAnyGetter #518

Open

Add test for #4388 #4391

Closed

Merge branch '2.17' into fix-4388

ce2a83e

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Allow using `@JsonPropertyOrder` with any-property (`@JsonAnyGetter`) #4396

Allow using `@JsonPropertyOrder` with any-property (`@JsonAnyGetter`) #4396

JooHyukKim commented Feb 22, 2024 •

edited

cowtowncoder commented Feb 23, 2024

JooHyukKim commented Feb 24, 2024 •

edited

cowtowncoder commented Feb 26, 2024

JooHyukKim commented Feb 27, 2024

cowtowncoder Mar 1, 2024

JooHyukKim Mar 3, 2024

JooHyukKim Mar 3, 2024

JooHyukKim Mar 3, 2024

JooHyukKim Mar 3, 2024

JooHyukKim Mar 3, 2024

Allow using @JsonPropertyOrder with any-property (@JsonAnyGetter) #4396

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Allow using @JsonPropertyOrder with any-property (@JsonAnyGetter) #4396

Conversation

JooHyukKim commented Feb 22, 2024 • edited

Modifications

notes

cowtowncoder commented Feb 23, 2024

JooHyukKim commented Feb 24, 2024 • edited

cowtowncoder commented Feb 26, 2024

JooHyukKim commented Feb 27, 2024

cowtowncoder Mar 1, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JooHyukKim Mar 3, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JooHyukKim Mar 3, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JooHyukKim Mar 3, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JooHyukKim Mar 3, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JooHyukKim Mar 3, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Allow using `@JsonPropertyOrder` with any-property (`@JsonAnyGetter`) #4396

Allow using `@JsonPropertyOrder` with any-property (`@JsonAnyGetter`) #4396

JooHyukKim commented Feb 22, 2024 •

edited

JooHyukKim commented Feb 24, 2024 •

edited