Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

@JsonAnyGetter should be allowed on a field #1458

Closed
cowtowncoder opened this issue Nov 18, 2016 · 6 comments
Closed

@JsonAnyGetter should be allowed on a field #1458

cowtowncoder opened this issue Nov 18, 2016 · 6 comments
Milestone
2.12.0

Comments

@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member

cowtowncoder commented Nov 18, 2016 •
edited

(follow-up from FasterXML/jackson-annotations#107)

Would be nice to allow use of @JsonAnyGetter on fields too; javadocs already claim this is possible.
So should add support for allowing that. Note that the counterpart, @JsonAnySetter does allow use on field already.
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder mentioned this issue Nov 18, 2016
Closed
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder changed the title @JsonAnySetter should be allowed on a field @JsonAnyGetter should be allowed on a field Nov 22, 2016
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder removed the 2.9 label Nov 22, 2016
@andrebrait andrebrait mentioned this issue Sep 17, 2020
Closed
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder added 2.13 good first issue Issue that seems easy to resolve and is likely a good candidate for contributors new to project and removed 3.x labels Sep 17, 2020
@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member Author

While not trivial to implement, this seems like something moderately challenging to implement -- but something users would like to see.

@dominikrebhan
Copy link
Contributor

Hi,

I would like to take this issue. I already lookup up in the code and I think it should be done within the classes @JsonAnyGetter, BasicBeanDescription and POJOPropertiesCollector. The outgoing type of AnnotatedMember is already present and it should be simply extendable for fields.

Best regards.

@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member Author

@dominikrebhan Go for it! This would be a good improvement.

I think you'll want to start with 2.12 branch (3.0 is too far out, master is tracking that). I just released 2.12.0-rc1, but there is still time -- and if it needs to go against 2.13 due to timing I can help.

This was referenced Oct 12, 2020
Merged
Merged
@dominikrebhan
Copy link
Contributor

I added the first pull requests. Could you please take a look at a first glance?

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder added 2.12 and removed good first issue Issue that seems easy to resolve and is likely a good candidate for contributors new to project labels Oct 14, 2020
@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member Author

PR looks good; added notes wrt cla, happy to merge!

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder removed the 2.13 label Oct 16, 2020
@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder added this to the 2.12.0 milestone Oct 16, 2020
@cowtowncoder
Copy link
Member Author

Was merged, will be in 2.12.0.

@cowtowncoder cowtowncoder mentioned this issue May 15, 2023
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
2.12.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@cowtowncoder @dominikrebhan