Develop Reference

Is there a way to check if a class is empty in java?

Sorry if the title is a bit confusing, I didn't really know how to word what I wanted to ask.
Basically, I am making an api call to a database that returns data as such:
[{"profiles":{"testexample":{"addresses":[{"city":"","street1":"","street2":"apt 320"}],"addressType":"HOME","city":"","dateOfBirth":"","emailAddress1":"","emailAddress2":"","emailAddresses":[{"email":"","preferred":1,"type":"BUSINESS"},{"email":"","preferred":0,"type":"PERSONAL"}],"firstName":"","lastName":"","phoneNumber":"","phoneNumbers":[],"phoneType":"HOME","postalCode":"","preferred":1,"street1":"","street2":""}]
The code I have below works fine when the database returns a non-empty profiles {}. I have the following Java classes that looks like the following:
public class Account {
#JsonProperty("profiles")
private Profiles profiles;
#JsonProperty("profiles")
public Profiles getProfiles() {
return profiles;
}
#JsonProperty("testexample")
public void setProfiles(Profiles profiles) {
this.profiles = profiles;
}
}
public class Profiles {
#JsonProperty("testexample")
private Profile testExample;
#JsonProperty("testexample")
public Profile getTestExample() {
return testExample;
}
#JsonProperty("testexample")
public void setTestExample(Profile testExample) {
this.testExample = testExample;
}
}
public class Profile {
#JsonProperty("dateOfBirth")
private String dateOfBirth;
#JsonProperty("dateOfBirth")
public String getDateOfBirth() {
return dateOfBirth;
}
#JsonProperty("dateOfBirth")
public void setDateOfBirth(String dateOfBirth) {
this.dateOfBirth = dateOfBirth;
}
}
So what I want to do when I get the data is check whether the getProfiles() returns empty, so I don't make the calls to anything within that object.
Please note, for the sake of simplicity I omitted other parts of the classes to focus primarily on what I wanted
This is what I have so far, and it works when the profiles {} is not empty
Account response = access.lookup(id, type); //This is to grab the response from the database, which is working.
response.getProfiles(); //This is the part that works when it has a profiles {} not empty, but fails on empty.
So what happens is that I don't get an error for response.getProfiles(), but if I tried to do response.getProfiles().getDateOfBirth(), it won't work because it will give a null pointer exception since the dateOfBirth isn't there.
I want to avoid calling anything within response.getProfiles() by skipping it if it's empty.

You need some basic null checking. The most basic way is to assign a new variable and check.
Profiles profiles = account.getProfiles();
if(profiles != null) {
//dosomething with profiles.getDateOfBirth()
}
The more "modern" functional Java way would be to use the Optional class.
String dateOfBirth = Optional.ofNullable(account.getProfiles())
.map(profile -> profile.getDateOfBirth)
.orElse(null);
(A note about your example: In the Account class, you have this.
#JsonProperty("testexample")
public void setProfiles(Profiles profiles) {
this.profiles = profiles;
}
Which appears to be an incorrect #JsonProperty annotation and might be causing some problems.
That said, it is not necessary to annotate the getters and setters. The one annotation on the field is sufficient.)

Dynamic POJO validation based on groups in spring

Consider the following pojo for reference:
public class User{
private String username;
private String firstName;
private String middleName;
private String lastName;
private String phone;
//getters and setters
}
My application is a basically spring-boot based REST API which exposes two endpoints, one to create the user and the other to retrieve a user.
The "users" fall into certain categories, group-a, group-b etc. which I get from the headers of the post request.
I need to validated the user data in runtime and the validations may differ based on the group of a user.
for example, the users that fall into group-a may have phone numbers as an optional field whereas it might be a mandatory field for some other group.
The regex may also vary based on their groups.
I need to be able to configure spring, to somehow dynamically validate my pojo as soon as they are created and their respective set of validations get triggered based on their groups.
Maybe I can create a yml/xml configuration which would allow me to enable this?
I would prefer to not annotate my private String phone with #NotNull and #Pattern.
My configuration is as follows:
public class NotNullValidator implements Validator {
private String group;
private Object target;
public String getGroup() {
return group;
}
public void setGroup(String group) {
this.group = group;
}
public Object getTarget() {
return target;
}
public void setTarget(Object target) {
this.target = target;
}
#Override
public void validate(Object o) {
if (Objects.nonNull(o)) {
throw new RuntimeException("Target is null");
}
}
}
public interface Validator {
void validate(Object o);
}
#ConfigurationProperties(prefix = "not-null")
#Component
public class NotNullValidators {
List<NotNullValidator> validators;
public List<NotNullValidator> getValidators() {
return validators;
}
public void setValidators(List<NotNullValidator> validators) {
this.validators = validators;
}
}
application.yml
not-null:
validators:
-
group: group-a
target: user.username
-
group: group-b
target: user.phone
I want to configure my application to somehow allow the validators to pick their targets (the actual objects, not the strings mentioned in the yml), and invoke their respective public void validate(Object o) on their targets.
P.S.
Please feel free to edit the question to make it better.
I am using jackson for serializing and deserializing JSON.

The easiest solution to your problem, as i see it, is not with Spring or the POJOs themselves but with a design pattern.
The problem you're describing is easily solved by a strategy pattern solution.
You match the strategy to use by the header you're expecting in the request, that describes the type of user, and then you perform said validations inside the strategy itself.
This will allow you to use the same POJO for the whole approach, and deal with the specifics of handling/parsing and validating data according to the each type of user's strategy.
Here's a link from wiki books with a detailed explanation of the pattern
Strategy Pattern
Suppose you have a basic interface for your strategies:
interface Strategy {
boolean validate(User user);
}
And you have 2 different implementations for the 2 different types of user:
public class StrategyA implements Strategy {
public boolean validate(User user){
return user.getUsername().isEmpty();
}
}
public class StrategyB implements Strategy {
public boolean validate(User user){
return user.getPhone().isEmpty();
}
}
You add a Strategy attribute to your User POJO and assign the right implementation of the Strategy to that attribute when you receive the post request.
Everytime you need to validate data for that user you just have to invoke the validate method of the assigned strategy.
If each User can fit multiple strategies, you can add a List<Strategy> as an attribute instead of a single one.
If you don't want to change the POJO you have to check which is the correct strategy every time you receive a post request.
Besides the validate method you can add methods to handle data, specific to each strategy.
Hope this helps.

You can use validation groups to control which type of user which field gets validated for. For example:
#NotBlank(groups = {GroupB.class})
private String phone;
#NotBlank(groups = {GroupA.class, GroupB.class})
private String username;
Then you use the headers from the request that you mentioned to decide which group to validate against.
See http://blog.codeleak.pl/2014/08/validation-groups-in-spring-mvc.html?m=1 for a complete example.
Updated to include a more comprehensive example:
public class Val {
private Validator validator = Validation.buildDefaultValidatorFactory().getValidator();
public boolean isValid(User user, String userType) {
usergroups userGroup = usergroups.valueOf(userType);
Set<ConstraintViolation<User>> constraintViolations = validator.validate(user, userGroup.getValidationClass());
return constraintViolations.isEmpty();
}
public interface GroupA {}
public interface GroupB {}
public enum usergroups {
a(GroupA.class),
b(GroupB.class);
private final Class clazz;
usergroups(Class clazz) {
this.clazz = clazz;
}
public Class getValidationClass() {
return clazz;
}
}
}
This doesn't use application.yaml, instead the mapping of which fields are validated for each group is set in annotations, similar results using Spring's built in validation support.

I was able to solve my problem with the use of Jayway JsonPath.
My solution goes as follows:
Add a filter to your API which has the capability to cache the InputStream of the ServletRequest since it can be read only once. To achieve this, follow this link.
Create a bunch of validators and configure them in your application.yml file with the help of #ConfigurationProperties. To achieve this, follow this link
Create a wrapper which would contain all your validators as a list and initialize it with #ConfigurationProperties and the following configuration:
validators:
regexValidators:
-
target: $.userProfile.lastName
pattern: '[A-Za-z]{0,12}'
group: group-b
minMaxValidators:
-
target: $.userProfile.age
min: 18
max: 50
group: group-b
Call the validate method in this wrapper with the group which comes in the header, and then call the validate of the individual validators. To achieve this, I wrote the following piece of code in my wrapper:
public void validate(String input, String group) {
regexValidators.stream()
.filter(validator -> group.equals(validator.getGroup()))
.forEach(validator -> validator.validate(input));
minMaxValidators.stream()
.filter(validator -> group.equals(validator.getGroup()))
.forEach(validator -> validator.validate(input));
}
and the following method in my validator:
public void validate(String input) {
String data = JsonPath.parse(input).read(target);
if (data == null) {
throw new ValidationException("Target: " + target + " is NULL");
}
Matcher matcher = rule.matcher(data);
if (!matcher.matches()) {
throw new ValidationException("Target: " + target + " does not match the pattern: " + pattern);
}
}
I have created a functioning project to demonstrate the validations and it can be found here.
I understand that the answer alone might not be very clear, please follow the above mentioned url for the complete source code.

jOOQ: Allowed-Character constraints?

I am considering moving from Hibernate to jOOQ but I can't find e.g.
how to have Pattern-Constraints on a String like this in Hibernate:
#NotEmpty(message = "Firstname cannot be empty")
#Pattern(regexp = "^[a-zA-Z0-9_]*$", message = "First Name can only contain characters.")
private String firstname;
How would I do that in jOOQ?

The "jOOQ way"
The "jOOQ way" to do such validation would be to create either:
A CHECK constraint in the database.
A trigger in the database.
A domain in the database.
After all, if you want to ensure data integrity, the database is where such constraints and integrity checks belong (possibly in addition to functionally equivalent client-side validation). Imagine a batch job, a Perl script, or even a JDBC statement that bypasses JSR-303 validation. You'll find yourself with corrupt data in no time.
If you do want to implement client-side validation, you can still use JSR-303 on your DTOs, which interact with your UI, for instance. But you will have to perform validation before passing the data to jOOQ for storage (as artbristol explained).
Using a Converter
You could, however, use your own custom type by declaring a Converter on individual columns and by registering such Converter with the source code generator.
Essentially, a Converter is:
public interface Converter<T, U> extends Serializable {
U from(T databaseObject);
T to(U userObject);
Class<T> fromType();
Class<U> toType();
}
In your case, you could implement your annotations as such:
public class NotEmptyAlphaNumericValidator implements Converter<String, String> {
// Validation
public String to(String userObject) {
assertNotEmpty(userObject);
assertMatches(userObject, "^[a-zA-Z0-9_]*$");
return userObject;
}
// Boilerplate
public String from(String databaseObject) { return databaseObject; }
public Class<String> fromType() { return String.class; }
public Class<String> toType() { return String.class; }
}
Note that this is more of a workaround, as Converter hasn't been designed for this use-case, even if it can perfectly implement it.
Using formal client-side validation
There's also a pending feature request #4543 to add more support for client-side validation. As of jOOQ 3.7, this is not yet implemented.

I recommend you don't try to use jOOQ in a 'hibernate/JPA' way. Leave the jOOQ generated classes as they are and map to your own domain classes manually, which you are free to annotate however you like. You can then call a JSR validator before you attempt to persist them.
For example, jOOQ might generate the following class
public class BookRecord extends UpdatableRecordImpl<BookRecord> {
private String firstname;
public void setId(Integer value) { /* ... */ }
public Integer getId() { /* ... */ }
}
You can create your own domain object
public class Book {
#NotEmpty(message = "Firstname cannot be empty")
#Pattern(regexp = "^[a-zA-Z0-9_]*$", message = "First Name can only contain characters.")
private String firstname;
public void setId(Integer value) { /* ... */ }
public Integer getId() { /* ... */ }
}
and map by hand once you've retrieved a BookRecord, in your DAO layer
Book book = new Book();
book.setId(bookRecord.getId());
book.setFirstname(bookRecord.getFirstname());
This seems quite tedious (and ORM tries to spare you this tedium) but actually it scales quite well to complicated domain objects, in my opinion, and it's always easy to figure out the flow of data in your application.

Spring, Java : Passing Generic object List as return type

I am working on a Spring-MVC application in which depending upon the mode set by the user, I have to return a List of either Object1 or Object2. Ideally, I can create two controller methods and send the List appropriately, but I would like to know is there any way, I can send any type of List in that Controller method.
Controller method :
#PreAuthorize("hasRole('ROLE_USER')")
#RequestMapping(value = "/findnotebydays/{days}/{canvasid}/{mode}")
public #ResponseBody List<Inotes> findNotesByDays(#PathVariable("days")int days, #PathVariable("canvasid")int canvasid,
#PathVariable("mode")boolean mode ){
if(!mode){
return this.groupNotesService.findGroupNotesByDays(days,canvasid);
} else {
return this.notesService.findNotesByDays(days,canvasid);
}
}
Basically, if mode is false, I want to return List<GroupNotes> and if mode is true, I would like to return List<Notes>. My naive approach that I thought I can just say it is an Object and return, but doesn't seem to work. Kindly let me know what I can do. Thanks a lot. :-)
Update
GroupNotes model class :
#Entity
#Table(name="groupnotes")
public class GroupNotes implements Inotes{
#Id
#Column(name="mnoteid")
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.SEQUENCE,generator = "mnote_gen")
#SequenceGenerator(name = "mnote_gen",sequenceName = "mnote_seq")
#org.hibernate.annotations.Index(name = "mnoticesidindex")
private int mnoticesid;
#Column(name = "mnotetext")
private String mnotetext;
//Other variables, getters, setters ignored
}
Notes model class :
#Entity
#Table(name="note")
public class Notes implements Inotes{
#Id
#Column(name="noteid")
#GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.SEQUENCE,generator = "note_gen")
#SequenceGenerator(name = "note_gen",sequenceName = "note_seq")
#org.hibernate.annotations.Index(name = "noteidindex")
private int noticesid;
#Column(name = "notetext")
private String notetext;
//Other variables, getters, setters ignored
}
Interface Inotes :
package com.journaldev.spring.model;
public interface Inotes {
}

Following the clean coder style, if you have to pass a boolean to a method, that method actually does two different things, and you want a method to do only one thing.
I would just make two controller actions, it is much clearer to the user and to the maintainer of the code later on.

You should probably use a common interface shared by both classes.
Declaring an interface like, for instance:
public interface INotes{
}
public class GroupNotes implements INotes{...}
public class Notes implements INotes{...}
Your code would become:
#PreAuthorize("hasRole('ROLE_USER')")
#RequestMapping(value = "/findnotebydays/{days}/{canvasid}/{mode}")
public #ResponseBody List<INotes> findNotesByDays(#PathVariable("days")int days, #PathVariable("canvasid")int canvasid,
#PathVariable("mode")boolean mode ){
if(!mode){
return this.groupNotesService.findGroupNotesByDays(days,canvasid);
} else {
return this.notesService.findNotesByDays(days,canvasid);
}
}
Another simpler solution would be just returning List (or List<?> for compliance) but this approach is more appropriated.

Considering Notes and GroupNotes are both implementing the Note interface (for example), you could always return List<Note>.

JSR-303 / Spring MVC - validate conditionally using groups

I worked out a concept to conditionally validate using JSR 303 groups. "Conditionally" means that I have some fields which are only relevant if another field has a specific value.
Example: There is an option to select whether to register as a person or as a company. When selecting company, the user has to fill a field containing the name of the company.
Now I thought I use groups for that:
class RegisterForm
{
public interface BasicCheck {}
public interface UserCheck {}
public interface CompanyCheck {}
#NotNull(groups = BasicCheck.class)
private Boolean isCompany
#NotNull(groups = UserCheck.class)
private String firstName;
#NotNull(groups = UserCheck.class)
private String lastName;
#NotNull(groups = CompanyCheck.class)
private String companyName;
// getters / setters ...
}
In my controller, I validate step by step depending on the respective selection:
#Autowired
SmartValidator validator;
public void onRequest(#ModelAttribute("registerForm") RegisterForm registerForm, BindingResult result)
{
validator.validate(registerForm, result, RegisterForm.BasicCheck.class);
if (result.hasErrors()
return;
// basic check successful => we can process fields which are covered by this check
if (registerForm.getIsCompany())
{
validator.validate(registerForm, result, RegisterForm.CompanyCheck.class)
}
else
{
validator.validate(registerForm, result, RegisterForm.UserCheck.class);
}
if (!result.hasErrors())
{
// process registration
}
}
I only want to validate what must be validated. If the user selects "company" fills a field with invalid content and then switches back to "user", the invalid company related content must be ignored by the validator. A solution would be to clear those fields using Javascript, but I also want my forms to work with javascript disabled. This is why I totally like the approach shown above.
But Spring breaks this idea due to data binding. Before validation starts, Spring binds the data to registerForm. It adds error to result if, for instance, types are incompatible (expected int-value, but user filled the form with letters). This is a problem as these errors are shown in the JSP-view by <form:errors /> tags
Now I found a way to prevent Spring from adding those errors to the binding result by implementing a custom BindingErrorProcessor. If a field contains null I know that there was a validation error. In my concept null is not allowed - every field gets annotated with #NotNull plus the respective validation group.
As I am new to Spring and JSR-303 I wonder, whether I am totally on the wrong path. The fact that I have to implement a couple of things on my own makes me uncertain. Is this a clean solution? Is there a better solution for the same problem, as I think this is a common problem?
EDIT
Please see my answer here if you are interested in my solution in detail: https://stackoverflow.com/a/30500985/395879

You are correct that Spring MVC is a bit picky in this regard,and it is a common problem. But there are work-arounds:
Make all your backing fields strings, and do number/date etc conversions and null checks manually.
Use JavaScript to set fields to null when they become irrelevant.
Use JavaScript to validate fields when they are entered. This will fix almost all of your problems.
Good luck!

I know this question is old, but I came upon it looking for an answer for a different situation.
I think for your situation you could use inheritance for the forms and then use two controller methods:
The forms would look like this:
public class RegistrationForm
{
// Common fields go here.
}
public class UserRegistrationForm
extends RegistrationForm
{
#NotNull
private String firstName;
#NotNull
private String lastName;
// getters / setters ...
}
public class CompanyRegistrationForm
extends RegistrationForm
{
#NotNull
private String companyName;
// getters / setters ...
}
The controller methods would look like this:
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.POST, params = "isCompany=false")
public void onRequest(
#ModelAttribute("registerForm") #Valid UserRegistrationForm form,
BindingResult result)
{
if (!result.hasErrors())
{
// process registration
}
}
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.POST, params = "isCompany=true")
public void onRequest(
#ModelAttribute("registerForm") #Valid CompanyRegistrationForm form,
BindingResult result)
{
if (!result.hasErrors())
{
// process registration
}
}
Notice that the #RequestMapping annotations include a params attribute so the value of the isCompany parameter determines which method is called.
Also notice that the #Valid annotation is place on the form parameter.
Finally, no groups are needed in this case.