Hi Alessandro Thank you for your message. For historic reasons, Field.in(Collection<?>) isn't type safe. This is because of erasure, we can't have both Collection<? extends T> and Collection<? extends Field<T>> arguments. This is why the Java compiler didn't tell you about your mistake. The IN predicate already accepts a Collection<T>, so you can "safely" pass a Set<MyEnum>. But that's the wrong type - you should have passed a Collection<Set<MyEnum>>, e.g.:
Set.of(Set.of(MyEnum.ENUM_1), Set.of(MyEnum.ENUM_2)) Does this make sense? Lukas On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 12:19 PM Alessandro Brambilla < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi group, > I've encountered a strange behaviour with IN condition and custom > converter/forcedType. > > First, Environment: > Jooq 3.7.13 (Pro FWIW) > DB: Oracle 19.0 > Java: JDK 21 > Spring Boot: 2.7.16 > > Let's Say I have a table with a varchar column that need to be custom > maaped to a Set<MyEnum> like: > > public final TableField<MyTableRecord, Set<MyEnum>> MY_COL= createField > (DSL.name("MY_COL"), SQLDataType.VARCHAR(20), this, "My custom Column", new > MyEnumConverter()); > > with MyEnum be like (simplified without extra checks): > public enum MyEnum{ > > ENUM_1("A"), > EMUM_2("B"); > > public static final String ALL = "all"; > private String code; > > MyEnum(String code){ > this.code = code; > } > > public String getCode(){ > return this.getCode(); > } > > public static Set<MyEnum> fromCode(final String from) { > if (ALL.equals(from)){ > return Set.copyOf(Arrays.asList(MyEnum.values())); > }else{ > return Set.of(MyEnum.valueOf(from)); > } > } > > } > > The column on DB should contains the code value if there is just one in > the Collection or the placeholder "ALL" if collection.size() > 1. > > To do so I use my custom datatype converter like this (simplified without > extra checks): > > public class MyEnumConverter implements Converter<String, Set<MyEnum>> { > > @Override > public Set<MyEnum> from(String myEnumString) { > if (myEnumString == null){ > return Set.of(); > }else { > return MyEnum.fromCode(myEnumString); > } > } > > @Override > public String to(Set<MyEnum> enumSet) { > if (enumSet.size()>1){ > return MyEnum.ALL; > }else{ > return enumSet.stream().findFirst().map(MyEnum::getCode).orElseThrow(); > } > } > > @Override > public Class<String> fromType() { > return String.class; > } > > @Override > public Class<Set<MyEnum>> toType() { > Set<MyEnum> s = Set.of(MyEnum.ENUM_1); > return (Class<Set<MyEnum>>) s.getClass(); > } > > > } > > > My Issue rise when I need to do a IN condition. I would expect I can use > > Set<MyEnum> enums = Set.of(MyEnum.ENUM_1,MyEnum.EMUM_2); > Condition inCondition = Tables.MY_TABLE.MYCOL.in(enums); > > unfortunately this will lead to a sql condition like: > > *MY_COL in ("ENUM_1","ENUM_2")* while I was expecting a condition like > *MY_COL > in ("A","B")* > > what am I missing? > > I have debuggeed it a bit and find a code I don't understand in > org.jooq.impl.ConvertedDataType<T,U> class in method convert where it > does: > > @Override > public final U convert(Object object) { > if (getConverter().toType().isInstance(object)) > return (U) object; > > // [#12155] Avoid double conversion passes between Result and custom > List<UserType> > else if (delegate.isMultiset() && !(object instanceof Result)) > return (U) object; > > // [#12413] Avoid double conversion passes between Record and custom > object types > // - List is what we produce when reading XML or JSON nested data in > standard SQL > // - Map is what we produce in SQL Server (which doesn't support > JSON_ARRAY) > else if (delegate.isRecord() && !(object instanceof Record || object > instanceof > List || object instanceof Map)) > return (U) object; > > // [#3200] Try to convert arbitrary objects to T > else > return ((Converter<T, U>) getConverter()).from(delegate.convert(object)); > } > > the last line looks strange to me.. why the converter.from() method? > should it be the converter.to()? > Or better, if (of course) the class is correct for what it does.. is > correct to use it to parse in conditions values? > > Of course I can work around by change the in condition like: > Condition inCondition = Tables.MY_TABLE.MYCOL.in(enums.stream(MyEnum:: > getCode).collect(Collectors.toSet())); > > but it looks to me like a manual redundant double converions. > > Or maybe I should use a Collection<Set<MyEnum>> in the in condition, since > the mapped type is Set<Enum>? > > Please, help me to get it right. thank you > > Alessandro > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "jOOQ User Group" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jooq-user/f21d7934-940c-4416-bf21-f5375e718197n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jooq-user/f21d7934-940c-4416-bf21-f5375e718197n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jooq-user/CAB4ELO4vtrGityxhLCngpugrZhByfsb4pSxU1tF0ywfodSkJOQ%40mail.gmail.com.
