MapToMap conversion now works when the target map does not have a
default constructor (as long as a new map copy is not required).
Issue: SPR-9284
Backport-Commit: 38c4393592
This should be significantly faster than our standard algorithm, for a very common case. Motivated by SPR-9802, even if the fix there uses a different approach, with transaction name determination not calling getMostSpecificMethod at all anymore.
Issue: SPR-9802
Prior to this change, PropertySourcesPropertyResolver (and therefore
all AbstractEnvironment) implementations failed to resolve nested
placeholders as in the following example:
p1=v1
p2=v2
p3=${v1}:{$v2}
Calls to PropertySource#getProperty for keys 'p1' and 'v1' would
successfully return their respective values, but for 'p3' the return
value would be the unresolved placeholders. This behavior is
inconsistent with that of PropertyPlaceholderConfigurer.
PropertySourcesPropertyResolver #getProperty variants now resolve any
nested placeholders recursively, throwing IllegalArgumentException for
any unresolvable placeholders (as is the default behavior for
PropertyPlaceholderConfigurer). See SPR-9569 for an enhancement that
will intoduce an 'ignoreUnresolvablePlaceholders' switch to make this
behavior configurable.
This commit also improves error output in
PropertyPlaceholderHelper#parseStringValue by including the original
string in which an unresolvable placeholder was found.
Issue: SPR-9473, SPR-9569
ClassPathResource.getDescription() now returns consistent, meaningful
results for all variants of ClassPathResource's constructors.
Issue: SPR-9415
Backport-Issue: SPR-9413
Backport-Commit: b50f6e19a6
Prior to this change, AbstractApplicationContext#setParent replaced the
child context's Environment with the parent's Environment if available.
This has the negative effect of potentially changing the type of the
child context's Environment, and in any case causes property sources
added directly against the child environment to be ignored. This
situation could easily occur if a WebApplicationContext child had a
non-web ApplicationContext set as its parent. In this case the parent
Environment type would (likely) be StandardEnvironment, while the child
Environment type would (likely) be StandardServletEnvironment. By
directly inheriting the parent environment, critical property sources
such as ServletContextPropertySource are lost entirely.
This commit introduces the concept of merging an environment through
the new ConfigurableEnvironment#merge method. Instead of replacing the
child's environment with the parent's,
AbstractApplicationContext#setParent now merges property sources as
well as active and default profile names from the parent into the
child. In this way, distinct environment objects are maintained with
specific types and property sources preserved. See #merge Javadoc for
additional details.
Issue: SPR-9446
Backport-Issue: SPR-9444, SPR-9439
Backport-Commit: 9fcfd7e827
Previously (since Spring 3.1.1) RecursiveAnnotationAttributesVisitor
logs at level WARN when ASM parsing encounters an annotation or an (enum
used within an annotation) that cannot be classloaded. This is not
necessarily indicative of an error, e.g. JSR-305 annotations such as
@Nonnull may be used only for static analysis purposes, but because
these annotations have runtime retention, they remain present in the
bytecode. Per section 9.6.1.2 of the JLS, "An annotation that is present
in the binary may or may not be available at run-time via the reflective
libraries of the Java platform."
This commit lowers the log level of these messages from warn to debug,
but leaves at warn level other messages dealing with the ability
reflectively read enum values from within annotations.
Issue: SPR-9447
Backport-Issue: SPR-9233
Backport-Commit: f55a4a1ac5
Prior to this commit, MutablePropertySources#get(String) would throw
IndexArrayOutOfBoundsException if the named property source does not
actually exist. This is a violation of the PropertySource#get contract
as described in its Javadoc.
The implementation now correctly checks for the existence of the named
property source, returning null if non-existent and otherwise returning
the associated PropertySource.
Other changes
- Rename PropertySourcesTests => MutablePropertySourcesTests
- Polish MutablePropertySourcesTests for style, formatting
- Refactor MutablePropertySources for consistency
Issue: SPR-9185
Backport-Issue: SPR-9179
Backport-Commit: 15d1d824b5
Due to changes made in commit 2fa87a71 for SPR-9118,
AbstractResource#contentLength would fall into an infinite loop unless
the method were overridden by a subclass (which it is in the majority of
use cases).
This commit:
- fixes the infinite recursion by refactoring to a while loop
- asserts that the value returned from #getInputStream is not null in
order to avoid NullPointerException
- tests both of the above
- adds Javadoc to the Resource interface to clearly document that the
contract for any implementation is that #getInputStream must not
return null
Issue: SPR-9163
Backport-Issue: SPR-9161
Backport-Commit: 7ca5fba05f
Prior to this commit, specifying a named @PropertySource with multiple
values would not work as expected. e.g.:
@PropertySource(
name = "ps",
value = { "classpath:a.properties", "classpath:b.properties" })
In this scenario, the implementation would register a.properties with
the name "ps", and subsequently register b.properties with the name
"ps", overwriting the entry for a.properties.
To fix this behavior, a CompositePropertySource type has been introduced
which accepts a single name and a set of PropertySource objects to
iterate over. ConfigurationClassParser's @PropertySource parsing routine
has been updated to use this composite approach when necessary, i.e.
when both an explicit name and more than one location have been
specified.
Note that if no explicit name is specified, the generated property
source names are enough to distinguish the instances and avoid
overwriting each other; this is why the composite wrapper is not used
in these cases.
Issue: SPR-9127
Prior to changes in commit 57851de88e,
AbstractResource#getFilename threw IllegalStateException unless
overridden by a subclass. Following that change, this method now throws
null instead, but ResourceTests#testAbstractResourceExceptions had not
been updated to reflect, resulting in a false negative failure. This has
now been fixed.
Issue: SPR-9043
- Drop 'expectedType' parameter from #getClass and #getEnum methods and
rely on compiler inference based on type of assigned variable, e.g.
public @interface Example {
Color color();
Class<? extends UserType> userType();
int order() default 0;
}
AnnotationAttributes example =
AnnotationUtils.getAnnotationAttributes(Example.class, true, true);
Color color = example.getEnum("color");
Class<? extends UserType> userType = example.getClass("userType");
or in cases where there is no variable assignment (and thus no
inference possible), use explicit generic type, e.g.
bean.setColor(example.<Color>getEnum("color"));
- Rename #get{Int=>Number} and update return type from int to
<N extends Number>, allowing invocations such as:
int order = example.getNumber("order");
These changes reduce the overall number of methods exposed by
AnnotationAttributes, while at the same time providing comprehensive
access to all possible annotation attribute types -- that is, instead of
requiring explicit #getInt, #getFloat, #getDouble methods, the
single #getNumber method is capabable of handling them all, and without
any casting required. And the obvious additional benefit is more concise
invocation as no redundant 'expectedType' parameters are required.
Recent changes in ExtendedBeanInfo involve invoking
ClassUtils#getMostSpecificMethod when determining JavaBeans get/set
pairs; if Java security settings control disallow reflective access,
this results in an AccessControlException.
This change defends against this (comparatively rare) scenario by
catching the exception and falling back to returning the method
originally supplied by the user.
This change was a result of noticing CallbacksSecurityTests failing
following the ExtendedBeanInfo modifications mentioned above
Issue: SPR-8949
Background
Spring 3.1 introduced the @ComponentScan annotation, which can accept
an optional array of include and/or exclude @Filter annotations, e.g.
@ComponentScan(
basePackages = "com.acme.app",
includeFilters = { @Filter(MyStereotype.class), ... }
)
@Configuration
public class AppConfig { ... }
@ComponentScan and other annotations related to @Configuration class
processing such as @Import, @ImportResource and the @Enable*
annotations are parsed using reflection in certain code paths, e.g.
when registered directly against AnnotationConfigApplicationContext,
and via ASM in other code paths, e.g. when a @Configuration class is
discovered via an XML bean definition or when included via the
@Import annotation.
The ASM-based approach is designed to avoid premature classloading of
user types and is instrumental in providing tooling support (STS, etc).
Prior to this commit, the ASM-based routines for reading annotation
attributes were unable to recurse into nested annotations, such as in
the @Filter example above. Prior to Spring 3.1 this was not a problem,
because prior to @ComponentScan, there were no cases of nested
annotations in the framework.
This limitation manifested itself in cases where users encounter
the ASM-based annotation parsing code paths AND declare
@ComponentScan annotations with explicit nested @Filter annotations.
In these cases, the 'includeFilters' and 'excludeFilters' attributes
are simply empty where they should be populated, causing the framework
to ignore the filter directives and provide incorrect results from
component scanning.
The purpose of this change then, is to introduce the capability on the
ASM side to recurse into nested annotations and annotation arrays. The
challenge in doing so is that the nested annotations themselves cannot
be realized as annotation instances, so must be represented as a
nested Map (or, as described below, the new AnnotationAttributes type).
Furthermore, the reflection-based annotation parsing must also be
updated to treat nested annotations in a similar fashion; even though
the reflection-based approach has no problem accessing nested
annotations (it just works out of the box), for substitutability
against the AnnotationMetadata SPI, both ASM- and reflection-based
implementations should return the same results in any case. Therefore,
the reflection-based StandardAnnotationMetadata has also been updated
with an optional 'nestedAnnotationsAsMap' constructor argument that is
false by default to preserve compatibility in the rare case that
StandardAnnotationMetadata is being used outside the core framework.
Within the framework, all uses of StandardAnnotationMetadata have been
updated to set this new flag to true, meaning that nested annotation
results will be consistent regardless the parsing approach used.
Spr9031Tests corners this bug and demonstrates that nested @Filter
annotations can be parsed and read in both the ASM- and
reflection-based paths.
Major changes
- AnnotationAttributes has been introduced as a concrete
LinkedHashMap<String, Object> to be used anywhere annotation
attributes are accessed, providing error reporting on attribute
lookup and convenient type-safe access to common annotation types
such as String, String[], boolean, int, and nested annotation and
annotation arrays, with the latter two also returned as
AnnotationAttributes instances.
- AnnotationUtils#getAnnotationAttributes methods now return
AnnotationAttributes instances, even though for binary compatibility
the signatures of these methods have been preserved as returning
Map<String, Object>.
- AnnotationAttributes#forMap provides a convenient mechanism for
adapting any Map<String, Object> into an AnnotationAttributes
instance. In the case that the Map is already actually of
type AnnotationAttributes, it is simply casted and returned.
Otherwise, the map is supplied to the AnnotationAttributes(Map)
constructor and wrapped in common collections style.
- The protected MetadataUtils#attributesFor(Metadata, Class) provides
further convenience in the many locations throughout the
.context.annotation packagage that depend on annotation attribute
introspection.
- ASM-based core.type.classreading package reworked
Specifically, AnnotationAttributesReadingVisitor has been enhanced to
support recursive reading of annotations and annotation arrays, for
example in @ComponentScan's nested array of @Filter annotations,
ensuring that nested AnnotationAttributes objects are populated as
described above.
AnnotationAttributesReadingVisitor has also been refactored for
clarity, being broken up into several additional ASM
AnnotationVisitor implementations. Given that all types are
package-private here, these changes represent no risk to binary
compatibility.
- Reflection-based StandardAnnotationMetadata updated
As described above, the 'nestedAnnotationsAsMap' constructor argument
has been added, and all framework-internal uses of this class have
been updated to set this flag to true.
Issue: SPR-7979, SPR-8719, SPR-9031
Prior to this change, roughly 5% (~300 out of 6000+) of files under the
source tree had CRLF line endings as opposed to the majority which have
LF endings.
This change normalizes these files to LF for consistency going forward.
Command used:
$ git ls-files | xargs file | grep CRLF | cut -d":" -f1 | xargs dos2unix
Issue: SPR-5608
Prior to this change, an assumption was made in
AbstractAutowireCapableBeanFactory that any factory-method would have
zero parameters. This may not be the case in @Bean methods.
We now look for the factory-method by name in a more flexible fashion
that accomodates the possibility of method parameters.
There remains at least one edge cases here where things could still fail,
for example a @Configuration class could have two FactoryBean-returning
methods of the same name, but each with different generic FactoryBean
types and different parameter lists. In this case, the implementation
may infer and return the wrong object type, as it currently returns
the first match for the given factory-method name. The complexity cost
of ensuring that this never happens is not likely worth the trouble
given the very low likelihood of such an arrangement.
Issue: SPR-8762
Juergen Hoeller
Phillip Webb
Rossen Stoyanchev
Chris Beams
Sam Brannen