Created Enum types have private field "name" but no accessor

[leflamm]

Hi, we're using

<groupId>org.raml</groupId>
<artifactId>raml-to-jaxrs-maven-plugin</artifactId>
<version>2.0.0</version>

to create resources from our raml definition. Problem is: all created Enum types have a private field name containing the actual enum value from the raml file, but there's no accessor for it.

public enum BucketType {
  RANGE("range"),

  STRING("string");

  private String name;

  BucketType(String name) {
    this.name = name;
  }
}

[jpbelang]

I'm curious as to why you need an accessor for the name, as it's equal to the enum value ? it's mostly equal to enum.name().toLowerCase().

(You may quite rightly tell me it's non of my business, but I'm curious).

This said, tonight I'll see if I can show you how to make a plugin to generate the accessor.

[leflamm]

(You may quite rightly tell me it's non of my business, but I'm curious).

:-)

1. A general remark: why put extra information (field name) into an Enum element if nobody can access it? Even my IDE (Eclipse in stock error/warning configuration) warns: "The value of the field PriceType.name is not used".

2. A specific example: Consider this generated Enum type.

public enum PriceType {
  NETLIST("net_list");

// ...
  
  private String name;

  PriceType(String name) {
    this.name = name;
  }
}

If I want to serialize an element of this type with Jackson or something similar into JSON it will serialize NETLIST into "NETLIST". If I need serialization into the exact value that is specified in the RAML file I could register a type-specific serializer that would access and use the name field which contains the desired value "net_list". Unfortunately I cannot because this field is not accessible.

So at the moment, as a work-around, I'm using reflection to force-access the information from that private field, but, to me, that seems unnecessarily complicated.

I see these options:

• ditch the inaccessible field, forget conventions and name the actual Enum elements exactly like they are named in the RAML file (even if they aren't all-caps, contain underscores, ...)
• provide an accessor for the actual Enum element name

Cheers, Christian

[jpbelang]

I'd like to ditch the incacessible field, honestly. it was put there for reasons I don't remember now. The actual raml name doesn't look like it's necessary.

(sorry for the delay, am currently working on builder/emitter for raml).

[giacgbj]

In my opinion, the names should be the same as specified in the RAML, without removing the underscores.

[uweschaefer]

you really need to be able to access exactly the string taken from RAML, which in version 2.1.0 is the name-field. If it is the SomeEnum.name(), fine but anything else make it unusable for us.