polygene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Niclas Hedhman (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Updated] (ZEST-105) ValueSerialization Type Lookup is wrong.
Date Wed, 16 Dec 2015 07:46:46 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZEST-105?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Niclas Hedhman updated ZEST-105:
--------------------------------
    Description: 
The ValueSerialization extensions are dependent on type lookup when deserializing values,
but they go about it in the wrong way. They make the type lookup relative to their own Module,
which completely breaks everything, and it can't even be worked around in many cases.

Entities that has values in them, are not prone to this, since a slightly different approach
is done in the entity store, although I am not sure it is immune to this Visibility/TypeLookup
issue.

There is even a "Values Module Finder" feature in the whole subsystem, which is a hack-ish
work-around the short-comings of the actual API.

At a minimum, a Module needs to be provided for which the Visibility should be computed from.
It is likely that the Module used is dynamic, and changes as the Value Type tree is traversed,
i.e. when a nested type is "found" its Module (i.e. the module it was found in) should be
used for its further TypeLookup operations. This mimics the UnitOfWork to a much closer degree.


The necessary model elements are present, and to correct the implementations shouldn't be
too hard, but there will be a change in the ValueSerialization API/SPI, and we should simply
delay the change until 3.0. There might be many over wanted changes that could affect the
new design.


  was:
The ValueSerialization extensions are dependent on type lookup when deserializing values,
but they go about it in the wrong way. They make the type lookup relative to their own Module,
which completely breaks everything, and it can't even be worked around in many cases.

Entities that has values in them, are not prone to this, since a slightly different approach
is done in the entity store, although I am not sure it is immune to this Visibility/TypeLookup
issue.

There is even a "Value Type Finder" feature in the whole subsystem, which is a hack-ish work-around
the short-comings of the actual API.

At a minimum, a Module needs to be provided for which the Visibility should be computed from.
It is likely that the Module used is dynamic, and changes as the Value Type tree is traversed,
i.e. when a nested type is "found" its Module (i.e. the module it was found in) should be
used for its further TypeLookup operations. This mimics the UnitOfWork to a much closer degree.


The necessary model elements are present, and to correct the implementations shouldn't be
too hard, but there will be a change in the ValueSerialization API/SPI, and we should simply
delay the change until 3.0. There might be many over wanted changes that could affect the
new design.



> ValueSerialization Type Lookup is wrong.
> ----------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZEST-105
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZEST-105
>             Project: Zest
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 2.0, 2.1
>            Reporter: Niclas Hedhman
>             Fix For: 3.0
>
>
> The ValueSerialization extensions are dependent on type lookup when deserializing values,
but they go about it in the wrong way. They make the type lookup relative to their own Module,
which completely breaks everything, and it can't even be worked around in many cases.
> Entities that has values in them, are not prone to this, since a slightly different approach
is done in the entity store, although I am not sure it is immune to this Visibility/TypeLookup
issue.
> There is even a "Values Module Finder" feature in the whole subsystem, which is a hack-ish
work-around the short-comings of the actual API.
> At a minimum, a Module needs to be provided for which the Visibility should be computed
from. It is likely that the Module used is dynamic, and changes as the Value Type tree is
traversed, i.e. when a nested type is "found" its Module (i.e. the module it was found in)
should be used for its further TypeLookup operations. This mimics the UnitOfWork to a much
closer degree. 
> The necessary model elements are present, and to correct the implementations shouldn't
be too hard, but there will be a change in the ValueSerialization API/SPI, and we should simply
delay the change until 3.0. There might be many over wanted changes that could affect the
new design.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message