Develop Reference

Freemarker Customize TemplateCache storage want to read the information from TemplateKey

I have my own customized freemarker template storage configured over freemarker, it is working fine.
Recently I want to make some changes on the cache management, I need to read the properties from the cache key which is typeof "TemplateKey". Unfortunately the "TemplateKey" is "private final static class". I have no access to this class and I cannot cast the Key object back into TemplateKey object.
I see the simplest way is to make source code change in TemplateCache.java to update the TemplateKey to be expose as public class.
Question to Freemarker designer: Is it any special reason to make this TemplateKey not be exposed? Is it possible to expose it in next build?
Thanks.
Rocky

At the first glance, I would keep the key class private, because exposing it would introduce a backward-compatibility constraint that can be in the way of further development. But what exactly is your use case that require information from the key?

We disabled localelookup, in this case, one FTL file are working for all locales. But the key includes locale, so sampe template was cached per locale, it is duplicated in memory.
One solution is: remove locale in key when manage it in cache, so I need read key properties. But it still need combine with other changes such as make template clone-able.
Please refer to this POS for detail: Freemarker Template Cache are in same content when locale are different, is it a concern on wasting memory?
Thanks.

Generating code for converting between classes

In one of the project I'm working on, we have different systems.
Since those system should evolve independently we have a number of CommunicationLib to handle communication between those Systems.
CommunicationLib objects are not used inside any System, but only in communication between systems.
Since many functionality require data retrieval, I am often forced to create "local" system object that are equal to CommLib objects. I use Converter Utility class to convert from such objects to CommLib objects.
The code might look like this:
public static CommLibObjX objXToCommLib(objX p) {
CommLibObjX b = new CommLibObjX();
b.setAddressName(p.getAddressName());
b.setCityId(p.getCityId());
b.setCountryId(p.getCountryId());
b.setFieldx(p.getFieldx());
b.setFieldy(p.getFieldy());
[...]
return b;
}
Is there a way to generate such code automatically? Using Eclipse or other tools? Some field might have a different name, but I would like to generate a Converter method draft and edit it manually.

try Apache commons-beanutils
BeanUtils.copyProperties(p, b);
It copies property values from the origin bean to the destination bean for all cases where the property names are the same

If you feel the need to have source code automatically generated, you are probably doing something wrong. I think you need to reexamine the design of the communication between your two "systems". How do these "systems" communicate?
If they are on different computers or in different processes, design a wire protocol for them to use, rather than serializing objects.
If they are classes used together, design better entity classes, which are suitable for them both.

Better way to store data in java?

I am currently working on a videogame, and i want to have the user be able to save their character to a new file. I know how to use the file io (for the most part), but i have been using the 'serialize' to serialize a whole object (that contains all the variables for the character) and save it to a file. The problem is that i am constantly updating the object and making changes to it, so when i try to load the old character with the new object, it errors and crashes. Same with levels as-well (an object holding a few 2d-array of variables).
There must be a better way to do this so it is compatible with future versions. If there is a way, would anybody please offer some source code and/or a link to a nice tutorial? All help is appreciated, thanks!!!

Use XML or an embedded database (fast and lightweight) such as Derby or H2. You could even use a plain old properties file.
In fact, see if the properties file will work for you. And only if that won't work, try XML or the embedded database approach.

if you are looking for java serializers here is the benchmark for you https://github.com/eishay/jvm-serializers/wiki/
Apache Avro seems to perform well.
Another way is to store the values in the persistent store like HSQLDB or H2 db and load it to memory at startup and persist when needed.You can also use SQLite (for driver check this)

You can implement Externalizable instead of Serializable, and in the readExternal() and writeExternal() methods you can put the logic to read/write the object. This way you have full control of serialization/deserialization and can make changes fairly easily. Alternatively you can use JSON serialization by using Gson. I would not recommend XML, but if you want to you can check out xstream for the same thing.

If you are extending your objects in backwards compatible ways, i.e. add fields, and not removing fields. Make sure that you have declared a serialVersionUID as per the serializable javadoc.
http://download.oracle.com/javase/1.5.0/docs/api/java/io/Serializable.html

One additional option to consider since you're already using serialization, you could implement Externalizable instead of Serializable. The code you use to serialize objects would remain the same. However in your class you would specify exactly how you want it serialized by overriding readExternal() and writeExternal(). E.g.:
public class MyClass implements Externalizable {
private int foo;
private String bar;
public readExternal(ObjectInput in) {
foo = in.readInt();
bar = in.readUTF();
}
public writeExternal(ObjectOutput out) {
out.writeInt(foo);
out.writeUTF(bar);
}
}
Just be sure to keep the order the same when reading and writing. Try to only add fields, however if you need to remove a field leave a gap to account for old versions.
Ultimately though if you're making a lot of changes it might best to switch to a properties or XML file as LES2 suggested. It'll be more portable and readable that way.

This game uses java.util.prefs.Preferences for cross-platform convenience. Because keys are stored individually, new additions rarely interfere with existing entries.

Loading Settings - Best Practices

I'm at the point in my first real application where I am adding in the user settings. I'm using Java and being very OO (and trying to keep it that way) so here are my ideas:
Load everything in the main() and
pass it all 'down the line' to the
required objects (array)
Same as above, but just pass the
object that contains the data down
the line
Load each individual setting as
needed within the various classes.
I understand some of the basic pros and cons to each method (i.e. time vs. size) but I'm looking for some outside input as to what practices they've successfully used in the past.

Someone should stand up for the purported Java standard, the Preferences API... and it's most recent incarnation in JDK6. Edited to add, since the author seems to savvy XML, this is more appropriate than before. Thought I believe you can work XML juju with Properties too, should the spirit take you.
Related on SO: Preferences API vs. Apache solution, Is a master preferences class a good idea?
(well, that's about all the standing up I'm willing to do.)

Use a SettingsManager class or something similar that is used to abstract getting all settings data. At each point in the code where you need a setting you query the SettingsManager class - something like:
int timeout = SettingsManager.GetSetting("TimeoutSetting");
You then delegate all of the logic for how settings are fetched to this single manager class, whose implementation you can change / optimize as needed. For instance, you could implement the SettingsManager to fetch settings from a config file, or a database, or some other data store, periodically refresh the settings, handle caching of settings that are expensive to retrieve, etc. The code using the settings remains blissfully unaware of all of these implementaton decisions.
For maximum flexibility you can use an interface instead of an actual class, and have different setting managers implement the interface: you can swap them in and out as needed at some central point without having to change the underlying code at all.
In .NET there is a fairly rich set of existing configuration classes (in the System.Configuration) namespace that provide this sort of thing, and it works out quite well.
I'm not sure of the Java equivalent, but it's a good pattern.

Since configuration / settings are typically loaded once (at startup; or maybe a few times during the program's runtime. In any way, we're not talking about a very frequent / time-consuming process), I would prefer simplicity over efficiency.
That rules out option number (3). Configuration-loading will be scattered all over the place.
I'm not entirely sure what the difference is between (1) and (2) in your list. Does (1) mean "passing discreet parameters" and (2) mean "passing an object containing the entire configuration"? If so, I'd prefer (2) over (1).
The rule of thumb here is that you should keep things simple and concentrated. The advantage of reading configuration in one place is that it gives you better control in case the source of the configuration changes at some point.

Here is a tutorial on the Properties class. From the Javadocs (Properties):
The Properties class represents a
persistent set of properties. The
Properties can be saved to a stream or
loaded from a stream. Each key and its
corresponding value in the property
list is a string.
A property list can contain another
property list as its "defaults"; this
second property list is searched if
the property key is not found in the
original property list.
The tutorial gives the following example instantiation for a typical usage:
. . .
// create and load default properties
Properties defaultProps = new Properties();
FileInputStream in = new FileInputStream("defaultProperties");
defaultProps.load(in);
in.close();
// create application properties with default
Properties applicationProps = new Properties(defaultProps);
// now load properties from last invocation
in = new FileInputStream("appProperties");
applicationProps.load(in);
in.close();
. . .
You could, of course, also roll your own system fairly directly using a file-based store and an XML or YAML parser. Good luck!

We have recently started using JSR-330 dependency injection (using Guice from SVN) and found that it was possible to read in a Properties file (or any other map) and bind it inside Guice in the module in the startup code so that the
#Inject #Named("key") String value
string was injected with the value corresponding to the key when that particular code was called. This is the most elegant way I have ever seen for solving this problem!
You do not have to haul configuration objects around your code or sprinkle all kinds of magic method calls in each and every corner of the code to get the values - you just mention to Guice you need it, and it is there.
Note: I've had a look at Guice, Weld (Seam-based) and Spring which all provide injection, because we want JSR-330 in our own code, and I like Guice the best currently. I think the reason is because Guice is the clearest in its bindings as opposed to the under-the-hood magic happening with Weld.

Is a "master preferences" class a good idea?

I have a class that manages user preferences for a large software project. Any class in the project that may need to set or retrieve a user preference from a persistent store is to call the static methods on this class. This centralized management allows the preferences to be completely wiped programmatically - which would be impossible if each pref was handled close to its use code, sprinkled throughout the project.
I ran into another implication of the centralization design in the course of this. The software has a public API. That API can be provided by itself in a jar. Classes in that API might refer to the pref management class. So, the pref manager has to go in the API jar.
Each preference might have a default value. Upon software startup, that default might be computed. The algorithm depends on the preference, and thus tends to reside near the use code. So if the pref manager needs to come up with a default, it calls the class in question.
But now that pref manager has become an "octopus class", sucking in all sorts of classes into the API jar that shouldn't be there. If it doesn't, then programs using the API jar quickly run into ClassDef exceptions. If it does, then the API jar is now bloated, as each of those other classes may refer to still others.
In general, do other Java programmers manage their preferences with a centralized class?
Does it make sense to distribute that static pref management class as part of a public API?
Should that pref manager be the keeper of the code for determining defaults?

IMHO, I think that the answer to your first question is "yes" and "no".
Preferences are commonly handled as a centralized class, in the sense that the class is a "sink" for many classes in the project. Trying to do it closer to the calling code means that if the same preference is later useful elsewhere, you are in trouble. In my experience, trying to put the preferences "too close" also results in a very inconsistent handling.
That being said, it is often preferable to use multiple preference classes or "preference set", each supporting a module or submodule. If you look at the main components of your architecture, you will often find that the set of preferences can be logically partitioned. This reduces the mess in each preference class. More importantly, it will allow you to split your program into multiple jars in the future. Now, the "default value" calculators can be placed in the module but still in a global enough area.
I would also suggest not setting preferences directly as static methods, but rather using some getInstance() like operation to obtain a shared instance of the preferences manage, and then operating on it. Depending on your semantics, you may want to lock that object for a while (e.g., while the user is editing preferences in a UI) and this is easier if you have an actual object.
For your other questions, I would say that your public API should have a way of letting users change preferences, but only if you can document well enough what the results of these changes could be.
If you use a single API function to get the "reference manager", you can give users the possibility of providing their own "default values calculator". The preference manager will ask this calculator first before resorting to the one you have provided by default.

Can't you just handle preferences in a really generic way? You'd then just use the preference manager to handle the persistence. So from a class you'd just say to the preference manager PreferenceManager.setPreference(key, value) and it doesn't care what it's saving in terms of the semantics of the data.
Or am I simplifying this too much?

I'm no Java Dev, but as far as the whole "octopus class" thing goes, can you not just supply an interface to the jar and connect the calls between the interface and the prefs manager at runtime, using the application configuration file to determine the prefs manager to instantiate?
Something like the .NET provider pattern?
That way you can decouple your jar from the prefs manager.

You might want to look at Cocoa's NSUserDefaults class for inspiration. It handles the problem you describe by having several layers of preferences, called domains. When you look up the value for a key, such as "PrintUsingAllCaps", it first checks for a value in the user's local domain. If it isn't found there, it can check the system-wide domain, or a network-level domain, and so on.
The absolute last place it checks is called the "Registration Domain", which is basically where hard coded defaults are supposed to go. So, at any point in my code, I can write a preference into the registration domain, and NSUserDefaults will only serve that value if the user hasn't overridden it.
So, in your case, you could provide a method for classes to set a default value for a key before it accesses the (possibly) user defined value. The preferences class doesn't have to know anything about the classes it is serving.
As somebody else suggested, if you need something more sophisticated, you could set a DefaultValueProvider callback object instead of a straight value.

I deleted my first answer since I misunderstood what the author was asking.
To actually address the actual question--it feels like your desire to place preferences (and the calculation of the default values) with the code that uses them makes sense.
Could you meet both requirements by using a preferences container class for each area that follows a pattern for that area, but having it register with a "Global" preference object collection?
Your global collection could do things like iterate over each set of preferences and reset it to defaults but your preferences themselves would still be locally defined and maintained so that it doesn't spider out into other parts of the code.
The only problem I can see is that if you allow the preference object to register itself when instantiated, you run the risk of trying to "reset to defaults" with some of the preferences not instantiated yet.
I suppose this could be fixed by having the main "preference" class instantiate all the others, then any piece of code could retrieve it's local preference object from the central one though a static getter.
This seems to be a lot like how some loggers work. There is a central mechanism for maintaining log levels, output streams and such, but each class has it's own instance of a "log" method and logs to it.
I hope this was more on target. Oh, I also agree with the accepted answer, don't ever make all your methods public static, always use a getter--you'll be glad you did some day.

The JSR-10 (java.util.prefs.*) API uses a factory method with a Class<?> parameter to create Preferences instances. That way the API can store preferences from different classes belonging to the same package in a single file.