These old forums are deprecated now and set to read-only. We are waiting for you on our new forums!
More modern, Discourse-based and with GitHub/Google/Twitter authentication built-in.

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]

Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Nested cross field validation
PostPosted: Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:08 pm 

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 10:37 am
Posts: 1
Maybe I'm doing something incorrectly, but I'd like to kindly ask you if there is a better way of doing deeply nested cross-validation, as I find Bean Validation API hard to use i such cases.
Hope that it's a good place to search for an answer.

I've created https://github.com/perceptron8/bval-example/ so you can see what it's all about.

Please compare https://github.com/perceptron8/bval-example/blob/master/src/main/java/bval/MyValidator.java
and https://github.com/perceptron8/bval-example/blob/master/src/main/java/bval/MyConstraintValidator.java.

It's impossible (or I don't know that it is possible) to create nested context and reuse it, mainly because one can't specify path components without giving error message first.

What I mean is that you can't write something like

ConstraintValidatorContext nestedContext = context
      .inIterable().atIndex(...); // this could point to x.y[yi].z[zi]

and then maybe

   .disableDefaultConstraintViolation(); // this could resolve to x.y[yi].z[zi].val

or just

   .addConstraintViolation(); // same as above, but with default message

Instead, you are forced to recreate whole path every time you want to add constraint violation. That's painful.

As you can see, there is no way to implement Z Validation without access to X fields, so one must create class-level constaint for X. Someone could argue that it's just a matter of adding back-refs from Z to Y and from Y to X and annotating Z,
but a) that's impossible if you don't own the model, b) Z's parent may be context dependent (imagine that both X->Y1->Z and X->Y2->Z are possible, where Y1 and Y2 fields are distinct classes). I'm stuck with both a) and b).

Don't get me wrong. I know that BV2 has much broader scope. At the same time I must confess that most of the time I find Spring's Errors stack-like behavior much more pleasant to use - despite not being type-safe.

Is there something that I missed?

Best regards

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
© Copyright 2014, Red Hat Inc. All rights reserved. JBoss and Hibernate are registered trademarks and servicemarks of Red Hat, Inc.