Is it possible for an enum to return different spring beans for different values?
If possible, we can create an enum holding different values, and we can return different type of spring component for a different value.
I wanted to achieve something like this:
public enum MyFactory {
BEAN1 {
#Autowired
Bean1 bean1;
#Override
public MyBean getMyBean() {
return bean1;
}
},
BEAN2 {
#Autowired
Bean1 bean2;
#Override
public MyBean getMyBean() {
return bean2;
}
};
public abstract MyBean getMyBean();
}
Thanks,
Java enums are designed to be constant values.
But to achieve you requirement, you should set the enum states after their creation or passing as parameter the ApplicationContext to the enum method or to an enum method initialization.
It defeats the enum purpose : constant values.
I think that it is make more sense to define a bean class that provides beans defined once and without way to change them.
#Component
public class MyEnumClass{
#Autowired
private Value valueA;
#Autowired
private Value valueB;
public Value getValueA(){
return valueA;
}
public Value getValueB(){
return valueB;
}
...
}
Where Value class is preferably not mutable.
Do not use enums to conditionally inject.
Spring is more than capable of doing that on its own.
This runs somewhat counter to the whole benefit of dependency injection; so long as your components define a common interface between them, you can inject whichever one you want at will without the need for (self-managed) conditions.
Supposing that you had components AComponent and BComponent. They are related and share a common-enough interface that it makes sense to codify it as an interface. You can then define this.
public interface Component {
Integer generateValue(String foo, List<Integer> bar);
}
public class AComponent implements Component {}
public class BComponent implements Component {}
Then, you can inject it in at will:
private Component component;
#Autowired
public MyService(#Qualifier("bComponent") Component component) {
this.component = component;
}
Spring is perfectly capable of managing the dynamic wiring for you here.
Alternatively, if these components are completely unrelated to one another, then you'll have to wire them in individually anyway as opposed to dynamically selecting one based on your needs.
Related
#Configuration
public class Product {
#Bean("xyz")
public String getMethod() {
return "abc";
}
}
#Component
public class Test {
String b;
Test(String xyz) {
this.b = xyz;
}
}
Is this any harm with this approach? I am trying to make change in the existing code where I am replacing the #Value with the getter as the method parameter. As I don't want to change the structure of the existing code I am trying to inject the method as bean as a replacement to #Value.
I suggest you to keep the #Value annotation instead of the whole #Bean configurations.
Why?
What if the getMethod()'s returned value needs to be changed very often? Everytime when you're changing something in the Product class, during build time it needs to be recompiled. What happens if the project is getting bigger and you're using this approach? It leads to longer build time and the more important thing is that this solution is not intuitive and it's hard to keep it clean. Don't think about complex solutions only to make the code look fancy. When you need to inject String values, the easiest approach is to create properties files (which won't get recompiled) and use the #Value annotation.
Now, if you want to add new methods without changing the structure of the existing code there are some patterns which you can apply like decorator pattern.
The main idea is simple: you're creating a decorator class which has an object of the type you need.
The easiest example (which you'll find everywhere on the internet) is the classic Shape example:
public interface Shape {
String someMethod();
}
#Component
public class CustomShape implements Shape { //implement the method here }
And here is the decorator:
public interface ShapeDecorator {
String someMethodExtended();
void someExtraMethod();
}
#Component
public class CustomShapeDecorator implements ShapeDecorator{
#Autowired
// #Qualifier - optional (only if you have more Shape implementations)
private Shape shape;
// now you can either:
// 1. provide new methods
#Override
public void someExtraMethod(){
System.out.println("Hello world!");
}
// 2. or you can EXTEND the Shape's "someMethod()" implementation
#Override
public String someMethodExtended(){
String oldString = this.shape.someMethod();
return oldString + " EXTENDED";
}
}
I defined some interfaces with generic, and I have some classes injected in Spring context as Beans, could I dynamic create a manager bean to manage them, and it could be autowired in fields without any Bean def code of this manager?
I have tried FactoryBean way to implement it, but not worked, it couldn't transmit generic class info and the FactoryBean bean couldn't transmit any changable arguments.
I have tried BeanFactory way to implement it, when I getBeansOfType, these objects created without autowired, not worked...
Now I have a finally method which I think it's not very smart that is using ImportBeanDefinitionRegistrar and ClassPathBeanDefinitionScanner to scan all classes, then insert the manager's beanDefinition.
I'll be very appreciate if you supply any method, Thank you very much !
I want to implement it like this:
public interface Strategy<E extends BaseEnum>
{
public E getType();
}
public interface LoginStrategy extends Strategy<LoginType>
{
public LoginStrategy getType();
}
#Strategy
public class ALoginStrategy implements LoginStrategy
{
public getType()
{
return LoginType.OTP;
}
}
#Strategy
public class BLoginStrategy implements LoginStrategy
{
#Autowired
private UserMapper;
public getType()
{
return LoginType.PASSWORD;
}
}
public LoginServiceImpl implements LoginService
{
#Autowired
private StrategyManage<LoginType, LoginStrategy> strategyManager;
}
I want the strategyManager in LoginServiceImpl which is marked Autowired could be auto generated.
I also have a other question. It may be easier to explain what I want.
I have a model convertor implements a ModelConvertor interface, TL is lowerModel's class, TU is upperModel's class.
now there is a bean include code like this:
#Autowired
private ModelConvertor<UserPO, UserDO> userConvertor;
normally Spring frame would throw a Exception with a "no such bean" message, so I want to make this field could auto inject a value like this:
#Autowired
private ModelConvertor<UserPO, UserDO> userConvertor[ = new DefaultModelConvertor(UserPO.class, UserDO.class)];
How can I do to solve these problems, thanks a lot again!
I have resolved this problem, scan specific packages and dynamic generate beans to put on context.
I want to return multiple spring beans based on the condition in the factory class.
Is this a good practice?
Any better ways to write the following piece of code?.
Any other design patterns suitable here?
Below is the code snippet:
package com.test;
import org.springframework.stereotype.Component;
import javax.annotation.Resource;
#Component
public class InstanceFactory {
#Resource(name = "instance1")
private Instance instance1;
#Resource(name = "instance2")
private Instance instance2;
public Instance getService(Condition condition) {
if (condition.one() && condition.two()) {
return instance2;
} else {
return instance1;
}
}
}
It depends on what you want to achieve. Factory Pattern is meant to create objects but what you are returning are objects already create somewhere else (Spring in this case). If you want to create beans that will be managed by Spring there are several ways:
#Conditional(YourConditionImplementation.class): This annotation added on a method of a #Configuration annotated class will allow you to create a bean when the given condition is fullfilled. Example here: https://javapapers.com/spring/spring-conditional-annotation/
You can uses as well BeanFactory to inject the definition of your bean (DefinitionBean) into the container. Example here: https://www.logicbig.com/tutorials/spring-framework/spring-core/bean-definition.html
Now, if you want an object that determine what object of type Instance fits better for some need then your approach is ok, but it is not technically a factory :)
When designing something like that I would face that solution considering two design patterns:
Strategy pattern: In order to replace repetitive if else every time you need to evaluate more instances.
Decorator pattern: Trying to make every condition as configurable as possible. They can be composed (decorated) for one or more predicates.
Considering these two pattens you might achieve something like this:
First, define which conditions will identify a given instance:
public enum InstanceType {
INSTANCE_TYPE_1(Condition::isOne, Condition::isTwo),
INSTANCE_TYPE_2(Condition::isOne, Condition::isThree),
...;
private List<Predicate<Condition>> evaluators;
#SafeVarargs
InstanceType(final Predicate<Condition>... evaluators) {
this.evaluators = Arrays.asList(evaluators);
}
public boolean evaluate(final Condition condition) {
return evaluators.stream().allMatch(it -> it.test(condition));
}
}
Then, you should link every instance implementation to an specific instance type:
#Component
public class InstanceOne implements Instance {
#Override
public InstanceType getType() {
return InstanceType.INSTANCE_TYPE_1;
}
}
Finally, a class to config where defining the relation between types and instances as EnumMap
#Configuration
public class InstanceFactoryConfig {
#Autowired
private List<Instance> instances;
#Bean
public EnumMap<InstanceType, Instance> instancesMap() {
EnumMap<InstanceType, Instance> instanceEnumMap = new EnumMap<>(InstanceType.class);
instances.forEach(i -> instanceEnumMap.put(i.getType(), i));
return instanceEnumMap;
}
}
Thus, you InstanceFactory can be replaced to something like this:
public class InstanceFactory {
#Autowire
private final EnumMap<InstanceType, Instance> instancesMap;
public void getInstance(Condition condition) {
instancesMap.get(getInstanceType(condition)).doSomething();
}
private InstanceType getInstanceType(Condition condition) {
return Arrays.stream(InstancesType.values())
.filter(evaluator -> evaluator.evaluate(condition))
.findFirst().orElseThrow(() -> new RuntimeException("Instance type not found"));
}
}
As you can see, you InstanceFactory is less prone to be modified. This means, every time you need you add a new instance implementation you only need to modify the InstanceType enum. Hope this is helps.
You can use spring existing FactoryBean interface and implement your own logic
It’s one of the best approaches to create beans in spring framework
Here is the link with example :
https://www.baeldung.com/spring-factorybean
See:
Spring Profile
The active profile is set by properties and based on the value you assign to the profile, Spring will load different beans for the same interface.
So it might be exactly what you need.
I am trying to autowire a member in a class using the constructor.
#Component
public class MyClass {
private ClassA myMember;
#Autowire
public MyClass(ClassA objectA) {
myMember = objectA;
}
}
If I have multiple sources that create beans of ClassA, is it possible to have a duplicate constructor definition that instantiates based on the bean that was autowired into this class?
I want to do something like this:
#Component
public class MyClass {
private ClassA myMember;
#Autowire
public MyClass(#Qualifier ("qualifierA") ClassA objectA) {
myMember = objectA;
}
#Autowire
public MyClass(#Qualifier ("qualifierB") ClassA objectB) {
myMember = objectB;
}
}
I tried using #Qualifier this way, but it didn't work.
Is it possible to do what I'm trying to do, with Spring? How can I disambiguate based on the name (qualifierA) or (qualifierB), if the bean definition is like:
#Bean (name = "qualifierA")
public ClassA getQualifierA() {
...
}
#Bean (name = "qualifierB")
public ClassA getQualifierB() {
...
}
You can't have two constructors with the exact same signature in a single class in Java. Nor any other programming language I've ever encountered. You might use method-injection instead, with two methods (named differently, of course), mark them as #Autowired(required = false) and use the proper #Qualifier(...) to specify the instance you want to inject. You might want to handle the case when both instances are present in the spring context, so no unexpected things happen.
The short answer is: no, that is not possible. In Java you cannot have two constructors with exactly the same signature. And also, you can assign only one value to your "myMember".
However, what are you trying to accomplish here? It seems that in some occasions MyClass needs to use "objectA" and in other occasions, you need "objectB".
For these scenarios, you should not use autowiring (you can't), but simply use explicit wiring:
#Bean
MyClass myObject() {
return new MyClass(qualifierA());
}
I'm using Spring 3.0.x and following the enum singleton pattern for one of my implementatons.
public enum Person implements Nameable {
INSTANCE;
public String getName(){
// return name somehow (Having a variable but omitted for brevity)
}
}
Recently we started to collecting those types via Spring so I need to add #Component to my class.
#Component
public enum Person implements Nameable {
INSTANCE;
public String getName(){
// return name somehow (Having a variable but omitted for brevity)
}
}
and collecting method is
#Autowired
public void collectNameables(List<Nameable> all){
// do something
}
After doing this I observed failures and cause was Spring cannot intialize enum classes (which is understandable).
My question is -
Is there any other way usign which I can mark my enum classes as a bean ?
Or i need to change my implementation?
If you really need to use enum-based singleton (despite the fact that Spring beans are singletons by default), you need to use some other way to register that bean in the Spring context. For example, you can use XML configuration:
<util:constant static-field="...Person.INSTANCE"/>
or implement a FactoryBean:
#Component
public class PersonFactory implements FactoryBean<Person> {
public Person getObject() throws Exception {
return Person.INSTANCE;
}
public Class<?> getObjectType() {
return Person.class;
}
public boolean isSingleton() {
return true;
}
}
You won't need to use the enum singleton pattern if you're using Spring to manage dependency injection. You can change your Person to a normal class. Spring will use the default scope of singleton, so all Spring-injected objects will get the same instance.