diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'website/features')
| -rw-r--r-- | website/features/Value.html | 5 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | website/features/experimental/Builder.html | 33 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | website/features/experimental/index.html | 2 |
3 files changed, 25 insertions, 15 deletions
diff --git a/website/features/Value.html b/website/features/Value.html index 92fcc825..e2cd8600 100644 --- a/website/features/Value.html +++ b/website/features/Value.html @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ </p><p> It is possible to override the final-by-default and private-by-default behaviour using either an explicit access level on a field, or by using the <code>@NonFinal</code> or <code>@PackagePrivate</code> annotations.<br /> It is possible to override any default behaviour for any of the 'parts' that make up <code>@Value</code> by explicitly using that annotation. - </p> + </p> </div> <div class="snippets"> <div class="pre"> @@ -54,6 +54,9 @@ </p><p> <code>@Value</code> was an experimental feature from v0.11.4 to v0.11.9 (as <code>@lombok.experimental.Value</code>). It has since been moved into the core package. The old annotation is still around (and is an alias). It will eventually be removed in a future version, though. + </p><p> + It is not possible to use <code>@FieldDefaults</code> to 'undo' the private-by-default and final-by-default aspect of fields in the annotated class. Use <code>@NonFinal</code> and <code>@PackagePrivate</code> on the fields in the class to override this behaviour. + </p> </div> </div> <div class="footer"> diff --git a/website/features/experimental/Builder.html b/website/features/experimental/Builder.html index 5ba74a27..a43d024b 100644 --- a/website/features/experimental/Builder.html +++ b/website/features/experimental/Builder.html @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ <div class="meat"> <div class="header"><a href="../../index.html">Project Lombok</a></div> <h1>@Builder</h1> - <div class="byline">It's like drinking tea with an extended pinky while wearing a monocle: No-hassle fancy-pants APIs for object creation!</div> + <div class="byline">... and Bob's your uncle: No-hassle fancy-pants APIs for object creation!</div> <div class="since"> <h3>Since</h3> <p> @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ Experimental because: <ul> <li>New feature - community feedback requested.</li> - <li>This feature will move to the core package soon.</li> </ul> Current status: <em>sure thing</em> - This feature will move to the core package soon. </div> @@ -43,7 +42,7 @@ <li>An inner static class named <code><em>Foo</em>Builder</code>, with the same type arguments as the static method (called the <em>builder</em>).</li> <li>In the <em>builder</em>: One private non-static non-final field for each parameter of the <em>target</em>.</li> <li>In the <em>builder</em>: A package private no-args empty constructor.</li> - <li>In the <em>builder</em>: A 'setter'-like method for each parmeter of the <em>target</em>: It has the same type as that parameter and the same name. + <li>In the <em>builder</em>: A 'setter'-like method for each parameter of the <em>target</em>: It has the same type as that parameter and the same name. It returns the builder itself, so that the setter calls can be chained, as in the above example.</li> <li>In the <em>builder</em>: A <code>build()</code> method which calls the static method, passing in each field. It returns the same type that the <em>target</em> returns.</li> @@ -52,18 +51,16 @@ </ul> Each listed generated element will be silently skipped if that element already exists (disregarding parameter counts and looking only at names). This includes the <em>builder</em> itself: If that class already exists, lombok will simply start injecting fields and methods inside this already existing - class, unless of course the fields / methods to be injected already exist. + class, unless of course the fields / methods to be injected already exist. You may not put any other method (or constructor) generating lombok annotation + on a builder class though; for example, you can not put <code>@EqualsAndHashCode</code> on the builder class. </p><p> Now that the "static method" mode is clear, putting a <code>@Builder</code> annotation on a constructor functions similarly; effectively, constructors are just static methods that have a special syntax to invoke them: Their 'return type' is the class they construct, and their type parameters are the same as the type parameters of the class itself. </p><p> - Finally, applying <code>@Builder</code> to a class is as if you added <code>@AllArgsConstructor(acces = AccessLevel.PACKAGE)</code> to the class and applied the - <code>@Builder</code> annotation to this all-args-constructor. Note that this constructor is only generated if there is no explicit - constructor present in the so annotated class, but this <code>@AllArgsConstructor</code> has priority over any other implicitly - generated lombok constructor (such as <code>@Data</code> and <code>@Value</code>). If an explicit constructor is present, no constructor is generated, - but the builder will be created with the assumption that this constructor exists. If you've written another constructor, you'll get a compilation error.<br /> - The solution is to either let lombok write this constructor (delete your own), or, annotate your constructor instead. + Finally, applying <code>@Builder</code> to a class is as if you added <code>@AllArgsConstructor(access = AccessLevel.PACKAGE)</code> to the class and applied the + <code>@Builder</code> annotation to this all-args-constructor. This only works if you haven't written any explicit constructors yourself. If you do have an + explicit constructor, put the <code>@Builder</code> annotation on the constructor instead of on the class. </p><p> The name of the builder class is <code><em>Foobar</em>Builder</code>, where <em>Foobar</em> is the simplified, title-cased form of the return type of the <em>target</em> - that is, the name of your type for <code>@Builder</code> on constructors and types, and the name of the return type for <code>@Builder</code> @@ -71,9 +68,15 @@ <code>FancyListBuilder<T></code>. If <code>@Builder</code> is applied to a static method that returns <code>void</code>, the builder will be named <code>VoidBuilder</code>. </p><p> - The only configurable aspect of builder are the <em>builder's class name</em> (default: return type + 'Builder'), the <em>build()</em> method's name, and the - <em>builder()</em> method's name:<br /> - <code>@Builder(builderClassName = "HelloWorldBuilder", buildMethodName = "execute", builderMethodName = "helloWorld")</code> + The configurable aspects of builder are:<ul> + <li>The <em>builder's class name</em> (default: return type + 'Builder')</li> + <li>The <em>build()</em> method's name (default: <code>"build"</code>)</li> + <li>The <em>builder()</em> method's name (default: <code>"builder"</code>)</li> + <li>The 'fluent' nature of the generated 'setter'-like methods. A fluent 'setter' is named just <code>fieldName()</code>, a non-fluent one is named <code>setFieldName()</code>. (default: <code>true</code>)</li> + <li>The 'chain' nature of the generated 'setter'-like methods. A chainable 'setter' returns the builder object itself, letting you chain 'set' calls. A non-chainable setter returns <code>void</code>. (default: <code>true</code>)</li> + </ul> + Example usage where all options are changed from their defaults:<br /> + <code>@Builder(builderClassName = "HelloWorldBuilder", buildMethodName = "execute", builderMethodName = "helloWorld", fluent = false, chain = false)</code><br /> </p> </div> <div class="snippets"> @@ -104,6 +107,10 @@ instances of a builder as keys in a set or map. However, that's not a sensible thing to do. Hence, no <code>hashCode</code> or <code>equals</code>. </p><p> Generics are sorted out for you. + </p><p> + If an explicit constructor is present, but <code>@Builder</code> is placed on the class, then the builder will be generated as if an explicit constructor is present with the + same arguments list as what <code>@AllArgsConstructor</code> would produce. If this constructor does not exist, a compile time error will result. Usually you should just either let + lombok make this constructor (delete your constructor from the source), or, move the <code>@Builder</code> annotation to the constructor. </p> </div> </div> diff --git a/website/features/experimental/index.html b/website/features/experimental/index.html index 31fcd5ad..16d58050 100644 --- a/website/features/experimental/index.html +++ b/website/features/experimental/index.html @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ as a core feature and move out of the experimental package. <dl> <dt><a href="Builder.html"><code>@Builder</code></a></dt> - <dd>It's like drinking tea with an extended pinky while wearing a monocle: No-hassle fancy-pants APIs for object creation!</dd> + <dd>... and Bob's your uncle: No-hassle fancy-pants APIs for object creation!</dd> <dt><a href="Accessors.html"><code>@Accessors</code></a></dt> <dd>A more fluent API for getters and setters.</dd> <dt><a href="ExtensionMethod.html"><code>@ExtensionMethod</code></a></dt> |