OSGi Blueprint visualization

What is blueprint?

Blueprint is a dependency injection framework for OSGi bundles. It could be written by hand or generated using Blueprint Maven Plugin. Blueprint file is only an XML describing beans, services and references. Each OSGi bundle could have one or more blueprint files.

Blueprint files represent architecture of our bundle. Let's visualize it using groovy script and graphviz available in my github repository and analyze.

Example generation

Pre: All you need is groovy and graphviz installed on your OS

I am working mostly with bundles with generated blueprint, so I will use blueprint file generated from Blueprint Maven Plugin tests as example. All examples are included in github repository.

Generation could be invoked by running run.sh script with given destination file prefix (png extension will be added to it) and path to blueprint file:

mkdir -p target

./run.sh target/fullBlueprint fullBlueprint.xml

Visualization is available here.

Separating domains

First if you look at the image, you see that some beans are grouped. You could easily extract such domains with tree roots: beanWithConfigurationProperties and beanWithCallbackMethods to separate blueprint files and bundles in future and generate images from them:

./run.sh target/beanWithCallbackMethods example/firstCut/beanWithCallbackMethods.xml
./run.sh target/beanWithConfigurationProperties example/firstCut/beanWithConfigurationProperties.xml
./run.sh target/otherStuff example/firstCut/otherStuff.xml

Now we have three, a bit cleaner, images: beanWithConfigurationProperties.png, beanWithCallbackMethods.png and otherStuff.png.

We also could generate image from more than one blueprint:

./run.sh target/joinFirstCut example/firstCut/otherStuff.xml example/firstCut/beanWithConfigurationProperties.xml example/firstCut/beanWithCallbackMethods.xml

And the result is here. The image contains beans grouped by file, but if you do not like it, you could force generation without such separation using option --no-group-by-file:

./run.sh target/joinFirstCutGrouped example/firstCut/otherStuff.xml example/firstCut/beanWithConfigurationProperties.xml example/firstCut/beanWithCallbackMethods.xml --no-group-by-file

It will generate image with all beans from all files.

Exclusion

Sometimes it is difficult to spot and extract other domains. It will be easier to do some experiments on blueprint. For example, bean my1 is a dependency for too many other beans. You could consider converting my1 bean to OSGi service and extracting it to another bundle.

Let's exclude my1 bean from generation via -e option and see what happens:

./run.sh target/otherStuffWithoutMy example/firstCut/otherStuff.xml -e my1

Result is available here. Now we see, that tree with root bean myFactoryBeanAsService could be separated and my1 could be inject to it as osgi service in another bundle.

You could exclude more than one bean adding -e switch for each of them, e. g. -e my1 -e m2 -e myBean123.

Conclusion

Blueprint is great for dependency injection for OSGi bundles, but it is easy to create quite big context containing many domains. It is much easier to recognize or search for such domains using blueprint visualizer script.


YOUR CODE HRER

Do not use AllArgsConstructor in your public API

Introduction

Do you think about compatibility of your public API when you modify classes from it? It is especially easy to miss out that something incompatibly changed when you are using Lombok. If you use AllArgsConstructor annotation it will cause many problems.

What is the problem?

Let's define simple class with AllArgsConstructor:
@Data
@AllArgsConstructor
public class Person {
    private final String firstName;
    private final String lastName;
    private Integer age;
}
Now we can use generated constructor in spock test:
def 'use generated allArgsConstructor'() {
    when:
        Person p = new Person('John', 'Smith', 30)
    then:
        with(p) {
            firstName == 'John'
            lastName == 'Smith'
            age == 30
        }
}
And the test is green. Let's add new optional field to our Person class - email:
@Data
@AllArgsConstructor
public class Person {
    private final String firstName;
    private final String lastName;
    private Integer age;
    private String email;
}
Adding optional field is considered compatible change. But our test fails...
groovy.lang.GroovyRuntimeException: Could not find matching constructor for: com.github.alien11689.allargsconstructor.Person(java.lang.String, java.lang.String, java.lang.Integer)

How to solve this problem?

After adding field add previous constructor

If you still want to use AllArgsConstructor you have to ensure compatibility by adding previous version of constructor on your own:
@Data
@AllArgsConstructor
public class Person {
    private final String firstName;
    private final String lastName;
    private Integer age;
    private String email;

    public Person(String firstName, String lastName, Integer age) {
        this(firstName, lastName, age, null);
    }
}
And now our test again passes.

Annotation lombok.Data is enough

If you use only Data annotation, then constructor, with only mandatory (final) fields, will be generated. It is because Data implies RequiredArgsConstructor:
@Data
public class Person {
    private final String firstName;
    private final String lastName;
    private Integer age;
}
class PersonTest extends Specification {
    def 'use generated requiredFieldConstructor'() {
        when:
            Person p = new Person('John', 'Smith')
            p.age = 30
        then:
            with(p) {
                firstName == 'John'
                lastName == 'Smith'
                age == 30
            }
    }
}
After adding new field email test still passes.

Use Builder annotation

Annotation Builder generates for us PersonBuilder class which helps us create new Person:
@Data
@Builder
public class Person {
    private final String firstName;
    private final String lastName;
    private Integer age;
}
class PersonTest extends Specification {
    def 'use builder'() {
        when:
            Person p = Person.builder()
                    .firstName('John')
                    .lastName('Smith')
                    .age(30).build()
        then:
            with(p) {
                firstName == 'John'
                lastName == 'Smith'
                age == 30
            }
    }
}
After adding email field test still passes.

Conclusion

If you use AllArgsConstructor you have to be sure what are you doing and know issues related to its compatibility. In my opinion the best option is not to use this annotation at all and instead stay with Data or Builder annotation. Sources are available here.

Primitives and its wrapped types compatibility

Introduction

How often do you think about possible changes in your API? Do you consider that something required could become optional in future? How about compatibility of such change? One of this changes is going from primitive (e. g. int) to its wrapped type (e. g. Integer). Let's check it out.

API - first iteration

Let's start with simple DTO class Dep in our public API.

public class Dep {
    private int f1;

    public int getF1(){
        return f1;
    }

    public void setF1(int f1){
        this.f1 = f1;
    }

    // other fields and methods omitted
}

f1 is obligatory field that never will be null.

Let's use it in Main class:

public class Main {
    public static void main(String... args) {
        Dep dep = new Dep();
        dep.setF1(123);
        System.out.println(dep.getF1());
    }
}

compile it:

$ javac depInt/Dep.java
$ javac -cp depInt main/Main.java

and run:

$ java -cp depInt:main Main
123

It works.

API - obligatory field become optional

Now suppose our business requirements have changed. f1 is not longer obligatory and we want possibility to set it to null.

So we provide next iteration of Dep class where f1 field has type Integer.

public class Dep {
    private Integer f1;

    public Integer getF1(){
        return f1;
    }

    public void setF1(Integer f1){
        this.f1 = f1;
    }

    // other fields and methods omitted
}

We compile only the new Dep class because we do not want to change the Main class:

$ javac depInteger/Dep.java

and run it with old Main:

$ java -cp depInteger:main Main
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: Dep.setF1(I)V
    at Main.main(Main.java:4)

Wow! It does not work...

Why does it not work?

We can use javap tool to investigate Main class.

$ javap -c main/Main.class
Compiled from "Main.java"
public class Main {
  public Main();
    Code:
       0: aload_0
       1: invokespecial #1                  // Method java/lang/Object."<init>":()V
       4: return

  public static void main(java.lang.String...);
    Code:
       0: new           #2                  // class Dep
       3: dup
       4: invokespecial #3                  // Method Dep."<init>":()V
       7: astore_1
       8: aload_1
       9: bipush        123
      11: invokevirtual #4                  // Method Dep.setF1:(I)V
      14: getstatic     #5                  // Field java/lang/System.out:Ljava/io/PrintStream;
      17: aload_1
      18: invokevirtual #6                  // Method Dep.getF1:()I
      21: invokevirtual #7                  // Method java/io/PrintStream.println:(I)V
      24: return
}

The most important are 11th and 18th instructions of main method. Main lookups for methods which use int (I in method signature).

Next let's compile the Main class with Dep which has f1 of type Integer:

$ javac -cp depInteger main/Main.java

and use javap on this class:

$ javap -c main/Main.class
Compiled from "Main.java"
public class Main {
  public Main();
    Code:
       0: aload_0
       1: invokespecial #1                  // Method java/lang/Object."<init>":()V
       4: return

  public static void main(java.lang.String...);
    Code:
       0: new           #2                  // class Dep
       3: dup
       4: invokespecial #3                  // Method Dep."<init>":()V
       7: astore_1
       8: aload_1
       9: bipush        123
      11: invokestatic  #4                  // Method java/lang/Integer.valueOf:(I)Ljava/lang/Integer;
      14: invokevirtual #5                  // Method Dep.setF1:(Ljava/lang/Integer;)V
      17: getstatic     #6                  // Field java/lang/System.out:Ljava/io/PrintStream;
      20: aload_1
      21: invokevirtual #7                  // Method Dep.getF1:()Ljava/lang/Integer;
      24: invokevirtual #8                  // Method java/io/PrintStream.println:(Ljava/lang/Object;)V
      27: return
}

Now we see the difference. The main method:

  • converts int to Integer in instruction 11th,
  • invokes method setF1 which takes parameter of type Integer (Ljava/lang/Integer;) in instruction 14th,
  • invokes method getF1 which returns Integer in instruction 21st.

These differences do not allow us to use the Main class with Dep without recompilation if we change f1.

How about Groovy?

We have GroovyMain class which do the same as Main class written in Java.

class GroovyMain {
    static void main(String... args) {
        Dep dep = new Dep(f1: 123)
        println(dep.f1)
    }
}

We will compile GroovyMain class only with Dep which uses int:

$ groovyc -cp lib/groovy-all-2.4.5.jar:depInt -d main main/GroovyMain.groovy

It runs great as expected with int:

$ java -cp lib/groovy-all-2.4.5.jar:depInt:main GroovyMain
123

but with Integer... It works the same!

$ java -cp lib/groovy-all-2.4.5.jar:depInteger:main GroovyMain
123

Groovy is immune to such change.

With CompileStatic

But what if we compile groovy with CompileStatic annotation? This annotation instructs groovy compiler to compile class with type checking and should produce bytecode similar to javac output.

GroovyMainCompileStatic class is GroovyMain class with only CompileStatic annotation:

import groovy.transform.CompileStatic

@CompileStatic
class GroovyMainCompileStatic {
    static void main(String... args) {
        Dep dep = new Dep(f1: 123)
        println(dep.f1)
    }
}

When we compile this with Dep with int field:

$ groovyc -cp lib/groovy-all-2.4.5.jar:depInt -d main main/GroovyMainCompileStatic.groovy

then of course it works:

$ java -cp lib/groovy-all-2.4.5.jar:depInt:main GroovyMainCompileStatic
123

but with Dep with Integer field it fails like in Java:

$ java -cp lib/groovy-all-2.4.5.jar:depInteger:main GroovyMainCompileStatic
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: Dep.setF1(I)V
    at GroovyMainCompileStatic.main(GroovyMainCompileStatic.groovy:6)

Conclusion

Change from primitive to its wrapped java type is not compatible change. Bytecode which uses dependent class assumes that there will be method which consumes or returns e. g. int and cannot deal with the same class which provides such method with Integer in place of int.

Groovy is much more flexible and could handle it, but only if we do not use CompileStatic annotation.

The source code is available here.

Easy configuration usage with ConfigSlurper

What's the problem?

We have to deal with properties in almost every projects that we write. Properties class, which we use in these cases, is just mapping key to value. Sometimes it is fine, but in many cases properties look like tree. Example of properties file is shown below:
systemName=test
endpoint.first.protocol=http
endpoint.first.address=localhost
endpoint.first.port=8080
endpoint.first.path=test
endpoint.second.protocol=ftp
endpoint.second.address=localhost
endpoint.second.port=21
endpoint.second.user=admin
endpoint.second.password=pass
Here we have simple properties like systemName and also complex endpoints definition (all properties which start with endpoint) and single endpoints definition (each endpoint properties starts with endpoint.<ENDPOINT_NAME>). How simple could it be to treat this properties like a tree and simply extract subset of them? The answer is using ConfigSlurper.

ConfigSlurper from properties

To use ConfigSlurper just parse properties object:
def 'should import configuration from properties'() {
    given:
        Properties p = new Properties()
        p.load(ConfigSlurperTest.getResourceAsStream('/configuration.properties'))
    expect:
        new ConfigSlurper().parse(p).systemName as String == 'test'
}
Parse method returns ConfigObject which is just very clever map Map. Now you could get property using dot notation:
def 'should get nested property'() {
    expect:
        fromProperties.endpoint.first.protocol == 'http'
}
But there is a deal. If you use ConfigObject then you cannot use it like normal Properties and get property with dots.
def 'should not used nested property as one string'() {
    expect:
        fromProperties.'endpoint.first.protocol' != 'http'
}
ConfigObject allows you to extract subtree as Properties:
def 'should get first endpoint info from properties'() {
    expect:
        fromProperties.endpoint.first.toProperties() == [
            protocol: 'http',
            address : 'localhost',
            port    : '8080',
            path    : 'test'
        ]
}
and even:
def 'should allow for nested property as one string when toProperties called'() {
    expect:
        fromProperties.endpoint.toProperties()['first.protocol'] == 'http'
}
If you want to know how many endpoint you have and how they are named you could use keySet method:
def 'should get list of endpoints'() {
    expect:
        fromProperties.endpoint.keySet() == ['first', 'second'] as Set
}
ConfigSlurper do not return null even if property is not found, so you could get nested property without fear:
def 'should not throw exception when missing property'() {
    expect:
        fromProperties.endpoint.third.port.toProperties() == [:] as Properties
}
You have only to be careful, when have property named like begining of another property:
def 'should throw exception when asking for too nested property'() {
    when:
        fromProperties.endpoint.first.port.test
    then:
        thrown(MissingPropertyException)
}
fromProperties.endpoint.first.port returns String and do not have test property. You could also print properties from ConfigObject:
println fromProperties.prettyPrint()
The output looks like this:
endpoint {
    first {
        path='test'
        port='8080'
        protocol='http'
        address='localhost'
    }
    second {
        password='pass'
        protocol='ftp'
        address='localhost'
        port='21'
        user='admin'
    }
}
systemName='test'
Hmm... It looks like DSL. Why do not keep your configuration in this manner?

ConfigSlurper from script

Your configuration could be a groovy script.
systemName = 'test'
endpoint {
    first {
        path = 'test'
        port = 8080
        protocol = 'http'
        address = 'localhost'
    }
    second {
        password = 'pass'
        protocol = 'ftp'
        address = 'localhost'
        port = 21
        user = 'admin'
    }
}
test.key = ['really': 'nested?'] as Properties
You could pass such configuration as resource stream or file content:
def 'should get config from script as url'() {
    given:
        ConfigObject config = new ConfigSlurper().parse(ConfigSlurperTest.getResource('/configuration.groovy'))
    expect:
        config.systemName == 'test'
}

def 'should get config from script as string'() {
    given:
        ConfigObject config = new ConfigSlurper().parse(ConfigSlurperTest.getResource('/configuration.groovy').text)
    expect:
        config.systemName == 'test'
}
What interesting all your properties do not have to be strings. It could be any object: String, long, int, etc.
def 'should get nested properties from script as int'() {
    expect:
        fromScript.endpoint.first.port == 8080
}

def 'should get really nested properties from script and continue digging'() {
    expect:
        fromScript.test.key.really == 'nested?'
}

Conclusion

You could deal with properties like simple Map, but why if you could instead use it like tree of properties? Sources are available here.