DRAFT - Split PLCondition into DB and post-fetch conditions #89
Conversation
effiban
force-pushed
the
split-condition-classes
branch
from
bbd4768 to
7ff608f
Compare
| if (isVirtual()) { | ||
| throw new UnsupportedOperationException("The equals operation is unsupported for virtual fields"); | ||
| throw new UnsupportedOperationException("PLConditions cannot be built for virtual fields"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As discussed this should be replaced later on with a condition that checks the number of fields in the virtual field - but right now we don't have a method returning number of fields, and it would probably not be efficient
| hasFieldValues(fieldValue(TestParentEntityType.ID, 2), | ||
| fieldValue(TestParentEntityType.FIELD1, "ParentBravo"), | ||
| fieldValue(TestParentEntityType.FIELD2, "ParentBravo"))); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove because this method is changed to work only for post-fetch
effiban
changed the title
effiban
force-pushed
the
split-condition-classes
branch
from
7ff608f to
7576627
Compare
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private boolean valuesEqual(final Triptional<T> thisTriptional, final T otherValue) { | ||
| return thisTriptional.matches(thisValue -> valuesEqual(thisValue, otherValue)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This method calls the public valuesEqual() and that way, ensures that the equality function will be used and not the default equals (this fixes a bug we had).
|
|
||
| import static java.util.Objects.requireNonNull; | ||
|
|
||
| public class PLCondition { | ||
| public class PLCondition implements PLBaseCondition<PLCondition> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@effiban
Let's call it PLFetchCondition
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought about it, but wasn't sure if we want to refactor this name - but I like the name
|
|
||
| import static java.util.Objects.requireNonNull; | ||
|
|
||
| public class PLPostFetchCondition implements PLBaseCondition<PLPostFetchCondition> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@effiban
Let's call it PLEntityCondition
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok, but I'm actually not sure it will be clear
|
|
||
| import static java.util.Objects.requireNonNull; | ||
|
|
||
| public interface PLBaseCondition<C extends PLBaseCondition<C>> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@effiban
Why do we need a common interface?
No description provided.