first pass using codegen instead of reflection #73
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
raboof
force-pushed
the
wip-52-replace-reflection
branch
from
9e9918a
to
da18abb
Compare
patriknw
reviewed
Jul 1, 2021
| Effect<? extends GeneratedMessageV3> effect = invoke(command, adaptedContext); | ||
| // TODO we used to support accepting ScalaPB and Jackson objects as responses as well. | ||
| // Are we OK with losing that? I guess we could have separate methods for that on the | ||
| // builder, though it's not obvious how to achieve type-safety for those then. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, I think we still want the json support. Could perhaps be an additional proto option on the entity (or even rpc) and we would generate different conversion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't the json support some specific proto type that we could identify here (and turn to some json model) or how did that actually work?
(Somewhat confusing when there is also transcoding from json to proto in the proxy)
samples/java-customer-registry/src/main/java/customer/CustomerValueEntityHandler.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| new CustomerValueEntityHandler( | ||
| // TODO I guess construction the Entity should somehow remain part of the | ||
| // customer API, so they can pass | ||
| // in anything they like in the constructor, including the context? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, we should change the registration methods to take a factory lambda CreationContext -> ValueEntity
raboof
force-pushed
the
wip-52-replace-reflection
branch
2 times, most recently
from
cd0f01a
to
3f61f0d
Compare
patriknw
force-pushed
the
wip-50-effect-patriknw
branch
from
b5cea76
to
5e170c3
Compare
raboof
force-pushed
the
wip-52-replace-reflection
branch
from
3f61f0d
to
a47d660
Compare
raboof
added a commit
to raboof/akkaserverless-java-sdk
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 5, 2021
Making the diff to lightbend#73 smaller
raboof
force-pushed
the
wip-52-replace-reflection
branch
from
77adc6e
to
d21a262
Compare
johanandren
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 6, 2021
Making the diff to #73 smaller
johanandren
force-pushed
the
sdk-codegen-dev
branch
from
6b933b9
to
92ff196
Compare
johanandren
reviewed
Jul 6, 2021
| CustomerDomain.CustomerState parsedState = | ||
| CustomerDomain.CustomerState.parseFrom(state.getValue()); | ||
| // TODO we used to support passing in the command as Jackson-parsed model object | ||
| // or as ScalaPB class as well. With this change we tie ourselves to Java protobuf. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can solve the ScalaPB part when we get to doing a Scala SDK?
raboof
force-pushed
the
wip-52-replace-reflection
branch
from
65efcfb
to
37de787
Compare
johanandren
reviewed
Jul 7, 2021
| @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ | |||
| import java.util.function.Predicate; | |||
| import java.util.stream.Collectors; | |||
|
|
|||
| public class ShoppingCartImpl extends AbstractShoppingCart { | |||
| public class ShoppingCartImpl extends ShoppingCartInterface2 { | |||
raboof
force-pushed
the
wip-52-replace-reflection
branch
from
35ae858
to
0764005
Compare
20 tasks
octonato
reviewed
Jul 13, 2021
Comment on lines
+26
to
+28
| option (akkaserverless.service) = { | ||
| type : SERVICE_TYPE_VIEW | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We don't need this for now. This is only needed when using the codegen and the eventing sample doesn't use it. Anyway, I will remove it for now since I will be pushing to this PR (soon).
Manually create a `CustomerValueEntityHandler` that would be generated as part of codegen. Added basic code to hook it into `Main`, but that API would still change and partly be generated. Reading the codegen code, it's clear we're losing some features that used to be available with codegen, marked them with TODO's - we should consider whether we're OK with losing them or want to introduce new mechanisms.
Regenerate test data against framework 0.7.0-beta.9 and the 'current' sdk. Had to adapt the test to reflect the changes in package in 32d1c07 and add a service type option to the view proto that I couldn't find anywhere in the history.
raboof
force-pushed
the
wip-52-replace-reflection
branch
from
0764005
to
e236356
Compare
raboof
commented
Jul 13, 2021
samples/java-customer-registry/src/main/java/customer/CustomerValueEntityHandler.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
octonato
changed the title
octonato
approved these changes
Jul 14, 2021
This was referenced Jul 15, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Manually create a
CustomerValueEntityHandlerthat would be generated as part of codegen.Added basic code to hook it into
Main, but that API would still change and partly be generated.Reading the codegen code, it's clear we're losing some features that used to be available with codegen, marked them with TODO's - we should consider whether we're OK with losing them or want to introduce new mechanisms.