XmlElementWrapper tests

[aloubyansky]

Adrian, I fixed the bug you showed me yesterday. Here is the issue http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBXB-126

Adding the test for it, I found that the XML for current XmlElementWrapper tests doesn't look right to me. E.g. for class

@XmlRootElement
public class Foo2
{
 private List<Number> items;

 public List<Number> getItems()
 {
 return items;
 }

 @XmlElementWrapper(name="bar")
 @XmlElements({
 @XmlElement(name="int", required=false, type=Integer.class),
 @XmlElement(name="float", required=false, type=Float.class),
 @XmlElement(name="x", required=false, type=MyNumber.class)
 })
 public void setItems(List<Number> items)
 {
 this.items = items;
 }
}

the xml is

<foo2>
 <bar>
 <int>1</int>
 </bar>
 <bar>
 <int>2</int>
 </bar>
 <bar>
 <float>1.1</float>
 </bar>
 <bar>
 <x>123456789</x>
 </bar>
</foo2>

while I would expect it to be

<foo2>
 <bar>
 <int>1</int>
 <int>2</int>
 <float>1.1</float>
 <x>123456789</x>
 </bar>
</foo2>

In fact, both pass. As well as something like

<foo2>
 <bar>
 <int>1</int>
 <int>2</int>
 </bar>
 <bar>
 <float>1.1</float>
 </bar>
 <bar>
 <x>123456789</x>
 </bar>
</foo2>

Because, I guess, all the particles are added as repeatable. But I don't think this is the way it is supposed to be.

[adrian.brock]

Scott wrote these tests.

I guess he put the bounds on the wrong part of the model? ;-)

 SequenceBinding seq = new SequenceBinding(schemaBinding);
...
 particle = new ParticleBinding(wrapperElement, 1, 1, false);

[adrian.brock]

I just found the opposite issue :-)
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBXB-127

[starksm64]

No, what is what I wanted, at least in terms of the xml as this models the application/module/x structure of an ear application.xml descriptor.

[aloubyansky]

Yes, now I remember...

[aloubyansky]

"adrian" wrote:
http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBXB-127

This looks confusing to me. Which test was it based on?

As I understand, what should be repeatable is the item particle. Which is. The collection type might have its own properties. Those should not be repeatable, as I imagine...

[adrian.brock]

The testcase is CollectionWithValues.
(remove the modification then you'll see it fail)

Its not a javabean its a real collection
and it doesn't have "items" it has an add() operation. :-)

@XmlType()
@JBossXmlNoElements
@JBossXmlChildren
({
 @JBossXmlChild(name="array", type=AbstractArrayMetaData.class),
 @JBossXmlChild(name="collection", type=AbstractCollectionMetaData.class),
 @JBossXmlChild(name="inject", type=AbstractDependencyValueMetaData.class),
 @JBossXmlChild(name="list", type=AbstractListMetaData.class),
 @JBossXmlChild(name="map", type=AbstractMapMetaData.class),
 @JBossXmlChild(name="null", type=AbstractValueMetaData.class),
 @JBossXmlChild(name="set", type=AbstractSetMetaData.class),
 @JBossXmlChild(name="this", type=ThisValueMetaData.class),
 @JBossXmlChild(name="value", type=StringValueMetaData.class)
})
@JBossXmlChildWildcard(wrapper=AbstractValueMetaData.class, property="value")
public class AbstractCollectionMetaData extends AbstractTypeMetaData
 implements Collection<MetaDataVisitorNode>, Serializable

If you think it is confusing then we could condition it on @JBossXMLNoElements
or something that identifies it for this usecase?

[aloubyansky]

Yes, I was thinking in terms of a JavaBean. By the item particle I meant the particle for the component. Like this is done in case there is @JBossXmlModelGroup.