I would like to know if there is a way, without writing the explicit query itself, to have my method query and filter using only one parameter instead of two.
Example, I have this method and both parameters in my method are the same values
public interface FooRepository extends JpaRepository<Foo, Long> {
Optional<Foo> findByFromRangeLessThanEqualAndToRangeGreaterThanEqual(int same, int value);
}
The above method works just fine, but how can I write the method name so that I only need to have one parameter/input, instead of two, since the parameters will always be the same values?
In this case I am basically trying to see if a value is between (inclusive between) one value.
So if my fromRange is 1 and my toRange is 5, then if the input is 5, is should return the result.
Related
As you can see in the title , I'd appreciate it if somebody can tell the usage of the Class .
There's a inside enum Type ,how to use it?
public static enum Type {
BETWEEN(2, "IsBetween", "Between"), IS_NOT_NULL(0, "IsNotNull", "NotNull"), IS_NULL(0, "IsNull", "Null"), LESS_THAN(
"IsLessThan", "LessThan"), LESS_THAN_EQUAL("IsLessThanEqual", "LessThanEqual"), GREATER_THAN("IsGreaterThan",
"GreaterThan"), GREATER_THAN_EQUAL("IsGreaterThanEqual", "GreaterThanEqual"), BEFORE("IsBefore", "Before"), AFTER(
"IsAfter", "After"), NOT_LIKE("IsNotLike", "NotLike"), LIKE("IsLike", "Like"), STARTING_WITH("IsStartingWith",
"StartingWith", "StartsWith"), ENDING_WITH("IsEndingWith", "EndingWith", "EndsWith"), NOT_CONTAINING(
"IsNotContaining", "NotContaining", "NotContains"), CONTAINING("IsContaining", "Containing", "Contains"), NOT_IN(
"IsNotIn", "NotIn"), IN("IsIn", "In"), NEAR("IsNear", "Near"), WITHIN("IsWithin", "Within"), REGEX(
"MatchesRegex", "Matches", "Regex"), EXISTS(0, "Exists"), TRUE(0, "IsTrue", "True"), FALSE(0, "IsFalse",
"False"), NEGATING_SIMPLE_PROPERTY("IsNot", "Not"), SIMPLE_PROPERTY("Is", "Equals");
// Need to list them again explicitly as the order is important
// (esp. for IS_NULL, IS_NOT_NULL)
private static final List<Part.Type> ALL = Arrays.asList(IS_NOT_NULL, IS_NULL, BETWEEN, LESS_THAN, LESS_THAN_EQUAL,
GREATER_THAN, GREATER_THAN_EQUAL, BEFORE, AFTER, NOT_LIKE, LIKE, STARTING_WITH, ENDING_WITH, NOT_CONTAINING,
CONTAINING, NOT_IN, IN, NEAR, WITHIN, REGEX, EXISTS, TRUE, FALSE, NEGATING_SIMPLE_PROPERTY, SIMPLE_PROPERTY);
...}
Part is internal to Spring Data. It is not intended to be used by client code. So if you don't implement your own Spring Data Modul you shouldn't use it at all nor anything inside it.
A Part is basically an element of an AST that will probably result in an element of a where clause or equivalent depending on the store in use.
E.g. if you have a method findByNameAndDobBetween(String, Date, Date) parsing the method name will result in two parts. One for the name condition and one for the DOB between condition.
The type enum lists all the different types of conditions that are possible.
The parameters of the elements are the number of method arguments required and (possibly multiple) Strings that identify this type inside a method name.
I find myself duplicating over and over the same java 8 expression:
In one method, I have:
List<Message> latestMessages = new ArrayList<>();
...
return latestMessages.stream().map(messageMapper::asMessageDto).collect(toList());
Then in another method of the same class, I have:
List<Message> messagesBetweenTwoUserAccounts = ...;
return messagesBetweenTwoUserAccounts.stream().map(messageMapper::asMessageDto).collect(toList());
The return type of both methods is: List<MessageDto>
I basically convert from a List<Message> to a List<MessageDto>.
Notice the duplicated expression:
stream().map(messageMapper::asMessageDto).collect(toList());
What would be the best way to factor out the above expression using java 8 constructs?
If you don't want to repeat the latestMessages.stream().map(messageMapper::asMessageDto).collect(toList()); multiple times, write a method that contains it :
public static List<MessageDto> transformMessages (List<Message> messages) {
return messages.stream().map(messageMapper::asMessageDto).collect(toList());
}
Now you can call it from multiple places without repeating that Stream pipeline code.
I don't know if that method should be static or not. That depends on where you are calling it from, and where messageMapper comes from (as Holger commented). You can add messageMapper as an argument if different invocations of the method require different mappers.
In my base-repository class
i wrote this function to make possible to retrive a sorted data collection from the DB.
T is a generic defined at Class level
public abstract class RepositoryBase<T>
where T : class
The code is this:
public IList<T> GetAll<TKey>(Expression<Func<T, bool>> whereCondition, Expression<Func<T, TKey>> sortCondition, bool sortDesc = false)
{
if (sortDesc)
return this.ObjectSet.Where(whereCondition).OrderByDescending(sortCondition).ToList<T>();
return this.ObjectSet.Where(whereCondition).OrderBy(sortCondition).ToList<T>() ;
}
My goal was to introduce a generic sort parameter so that i could call the function in this way:
repo.GetAll (model=>model.field>0, model=>model.sortableField, true)
i mean that i could specify the sorting field directly via anonymous function and so using Intellisense...
Unfortunately this function doesn't work as the last code line generate errors at compile time.
I tried also to call:
repo.GetAll<Model> (model=>model.field>0, model=>model.sortableField, true)
but this don't work.
How should i write the function to meet my goal?
i'm working with EF 5, c#, .NET 4.5
You're using ObjectSet which implements IQueryable<T>. That is extended by methods on System.Linq.Queryable, which accept Expression<Func< parameters. It is correct to use those Expression parameters, as you intend for execution to occur in the database, not locally.
A Func is an anonymous delegate, a .net method.
An Expression is a tree, which may be compiled into a Func, or may be translated into Sql or something else.
You showed us a really abstract use of the method, but not an actual use of the method, or the compiler error. I suspect the error you may be making is confusing the two type parameters.
You said:
repo.GetAll<Model> (model=>model.field>0, model=>model.sortableField, true)
But this generic parameter for this method represents the type of sortableField. If sortableField isn't a Model - this is wrong.
Instead, you should be doing something like this:
Repository<Person> myRepo = new Repository<Person>();
myRepo.GetAll<DateTime>(p => p.Friends.Count() > 3, p => p.DateOfBirth, true);
If specifying the sort type breaks your intended pattern of usage, consider hiding that key by using an IOrderer: Store multi-type OrderBy expression as a property
I'm using Entity Framework and I have a custum IQueryProvider. I use the Execute method so that I can modify the result (a POCO) of a query after is has been executed. I want to do the same for collections. The problem is that the Execute method is only called for single result.
As described on MSDN :
The Execute method executes queries that return a single value
(instead of an enumerable sequence of values). Expression trees that
represent queries that return enumerable results are executed when
their associated IQueryable object is enumerated.
Is there another way to accomplish what I want that I missed?
I know I could write a specific method inside a repository or whatever but I want to apply this to all possible queries.
This is true that the actual signature is:
public object Execute(Expression expression)
public TResult Execute<TResult>(Expression expression)
However, that does not mean that the TResult will always be a single element! It is the type expected to be returned from the expression.
Also, note that there are no constraints over the TResult, not even 'class' or 'new()'.
The TResult is a MyObject when your expression is of singular result, like .FirstOrDefault(). However, the TResult can also be a double when you .Avg() over the query, and also it can be IEnumerable<MyObject> when your query is plain .Select.Where.
Proof(*) - I've just set a breakpoint inside my Execute() implementation, and I've inspected it with Watches:
typeof(TResult).FullName "System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable`1[[xxxxxx,xxxxx]]"
expression.Type.FullName "System.Linq.IQueryable`1[[xxxxxx,xxxxx]]"
I admit that three overloads, one object, one TResult and one IEnumerable<TResult> would probably be more readable. I think they did not place three of them as extensibility point for future interfaces. I can imagine that in future they came up with something more robust than IEnumerable, and then they'd need to add another overload and so on. With simple this interface can process any type.
Oh, see, we now also have IQueryable in addition to IEnumerable, so it would need at least four overloads:)
The Proof is marked with (*) because I have had a small bug/feature in my IQueryProvider's code that has is obscuring the real behavior of LINQ.
LINQ indeed calls the generic Execute only for singular cases. This is a shortcut, an optimization.
For all other cases, it ... doesn't call Execute() it at all
For those all other cases, the LINQ calls .GetEnumerator on your custom IQueryable<> implementation, that what happens is dictated by .. simply what you wrote there. I mean, assuming that you actually provided custom implementations of IQueryable. That would be strange if you did not - that's just about 15 lines in total, nothing compared to the length of custom provider.
In the project where I got the "proof" from, my implementation looks like:
public System.Collections.IEnumerator GetEnumerator()
{
return Provider.Execute<IEnumerable>( this.Expression ).GetEnumerator();
}
public IEnumerator<TOut> GetEnumerator()
{
return Provider.Execute<IEnumerable<TOut>>( this.Expression ).GetEnumerator();
}
of course, one of them would be explicit due to name collision. Please note that to fetch the enumerator, I actually call the Execute with explicitely stated TResult. This is why in my "proof" those types occurred.
I think that you see the "TResult = Single Element" case, because you wrote i.e. something like this:
public IEnumerator<TOut> GetEnumerator()
{
return Provider.Execute<TOut>( this.Expression ).GetEnumerator();
}
Which really renders your Execute implementation without choice, and must return single element. IMHO, this is just a bug in your code. You could have done it like in my example above, or you could simply use the untyped Execute:
public System.Collections.IEnumerator GetEnumerator()
{
return ((IEnumerable)Provider.Execute( this.Expression )).GetEnumerator();
}
public IEnumerator<TOut> GetEnumerator()
{
return ((IEnumerable<TOut>)Provider.Execute( this.Expression )).GetEnumerator();
}
Of course, your implementation of Execute must make sure to return proper IEnumerables for such queries!
Expression trees that represent queries that return enumerable results are executed when their associated IQueryable object is enumerated.
I recommend enumerating your query:
foreach(T t in query)
{
CustomModification(t);
}
Your IQueryProvider must implement CreateQuery<T>. You get to choose the implemenation of the resulting IQueryable. If you want that IQueryable to do something to each row when enumerated, you get to write that implementation.
The final answer is that it's not possible.
Situation
I have a class that holds a generic type, and it also has a non-zero arg constructor. I don't want to expose a zero arg constructor because it can lead to erroneous data.
public class Geometries<T extends AbstractGeometry>{
private final GeometryType geometryType;
private Collection<T> geometries;
public Geometries(Class<T> classOfT) {
this.geometryType = lookup(classOfT);//strict typing.
}
}
There are several (known and final) classes that may extend AbstractGeometry.
public final Point extends AbstractGeometry{ ....}
public final Polygon extends AbstractGeometry{ ....}
Example json:
{
"geometryType" : "point",
"geometries" : [
{ ...contents differ... hence AbstractGeometry},
{ ...contents differ... hence AbstractGeometry},
{ ...contents differ... hence AbstractGeometry}
]
}
Question
How can I write a JsonDeserializer that will deserialize a Generic Typed class (such as Geometires)?
CHEERS :)
p.s. I don't believe I need a JsonSerializer, this should work out of the box :)
Note: This answer was based on the first version of the question. The edits and subsequent question(s) change things.
p.s. I don't believe I need a JsonSerializer, this should work out of the box :)
That's not the case at all. The JSON example you posted does not match the Java class structure you apparently want to bind to and generate.
If you want JSON like that from Java like that, you'll definitely need custom serialization processing.
The JSON structure is
an object with two elements
element 1 is a string named "geometryType"
element 2 is an object named "geometries", with differing elements based on type
The Java structure is
an object with two fields
field 1, named "geometryType", is a complex type GeometryType
field 2, named "geometries" is a Collection of AbstractGeometry objects
Major Differences:
JSON string does not match Java type GeometryType
JSON object does not match Java type Collection
Given this Java structure, a matching JSON structure would be
an object with two elements
element 1, named "geometryType", is a complex object, with elements matching the fields in GeometryType
element 2, named "geometries", is a collection of objects, where the elements of the different objects in the collection differ based on specific AbstractGeometry types
Are you sure that what you posted is really what you intended? I'm guessing that either or both of the structures should be changed.
Regarding any question on polymorphic deserialization, please note that the issue was discussed a few times on StackOverflow.com already. I posted a link to four different such questions and answers (some with code examples) at Can I instantiate a superclass and have a particular subclass be instantiated based on the parameters supplied.