This page answers common how-to questions that may come up when using AutoValue. You should read and understand the Introduction first.
Questions specific to usage of the builder option are documented separately; for this, start by reading AutoValue with builders.
How do I...
- ... also generate a builder for my value class?
- ... use AutoValue with a nested class?
- ... use (or not use) JavaBeans-style name prefixes?
- ... use nullable properties?
- ... perform other validation?
- ... use a property of a mutable type?
- ... use a custom implementation of
equals
, etc.? - ... ignore certain properties in
equals
, etc.? - ... have multiple create methods, or name it/them differently?
- ... have AutoValue also implement abstract methods from my supertypes?
- ... use AutoValue with a generic class?
- ... make my class Java- or GWT- serializable?
- ... apply an annotation to a generated field?
- ... use AutoValue to implement an annotation type?
- ... also include setter (mutator) methods?
- ... also generate
compareTo
? - ... use a primitive array for a property value?
- ... use an object array for a property value?
- ... have one
@AutoValue
class extend another? - ... keep my accessor methods private?
- ... expose a constructor, not factory method, as my public creation API?
- ... use AutoValue on an interface, not abstract class?
- ... memoize ("cache") derived properties?
- ... memoize the result of
hashCode
ortoString
?
Please see AutoValue with builders.
AutoValue composes the generated class name in the form
AutoValue_
Outer_Middle_Inner
.
As many of these segments will be used in the generated name as required.
Only the simple class name will appear in toString
output.
class Outer {
static class Middle {
@AutoValue
abstract static class Inner {
static Inner create(String foo) {
return new AutoValue_Outer_Middle_Inner(foo);
}
...
Some developers prefer to name their accessors with a get-
or is-
prefix,
but would prefer that only the "bare" property name be used in toString
and
for the generated constructor's parameter names.
AutoValue will do exactly this, but only if you are using these prefixes
consistently. In that case, it infers your intended property name by first
stripping the get-
or is-
prefix, then adjusting the case of what remains as
specified by
Introspector.decapitalize.
Note that, in keeping with the JavaBeans specification, the is-
prefix is only
allowed on boolean
-returning methods. get-
is allowed on any type of
accessor.
Ordinarily the generated constructor will reject any null values. If you want to
accept null, simply apply any annotation named @Nullable
to the appropriate
accessor methods. This causes AutoValue to remove the null checks and generate
null-friendly code for equals
, hashCode
and toString
. Example:
@AutoValue
public abstract class Foo {
public static Foo create(@Nullable Bar bar) {
return new AutoValue_Foo(bar);
}
@Nullable abstract Bar bar();
}
This example also shows annotating the corresponding create
parameter with
@Nullable
. AutoValue does not actually require this annotation, only the one
on the accessor, but we recommended it as useful documentation to your caller.
Null checks are added automatically (as above). For other types of precondition checks or pre-processing, just add them to your factory method:
static MyType create(String first, String second) {
checkArgument(!first.isEmpty());
return new AutoValue_MyType(first, second.trim());
}
First, check if the mutable type has a corresponding immutable cousin. For
example, the types List<String>
and String[]
have the immutable counterpart
ImmutableList<String>
in Guava. If so, use
the immutable type for your property, and only accept the mutable type during
construction:
@AutoValue
public abstract class ListExample {
public static ListExample create(String[] mutableNames) {
return new AutoValue_ListExample(ImmutableList.copyOf(mutableNames));
}
public abstract ImmutableList<String> names();
}
Note: this is a perfectly sensible practice, not an ugly workaround!
If there is no suitable immutable type to use, you'll need to proceed with caution. Your static factory method should pass a clone of the passed object to the generated constructor. Your accessor method should document a very loud warning never to mutate the object returned.
@AutoValue
public abstract class MutableExample {
public static MutableExample create(MutablePropertyType ouch) {
// Replace `.clone` below with the right copying code for this type
return new AutoValue_MutableExample(ouch.clone());
}
/**
* Returns the ouch associated with this object; <b>do not mutate</b> the
* returned object.
*/
public abstract MutablePropertyType ouch();
}
Note: this is a perfectly ugly workaround, not a sensible practice!
Simply write your custom implementation; AutoValue will notice this and will skip generating its own. Your hand-written logic will thus be inherited on the concrete implementation class. We call this underriding the method.
Remember when doing this that you are losing AutoValue's protections. Be careful
to follow the basic rules of hash codes: equal objects must have equal hash
codes always, and equal hash codes should imply equal objects almost always.
You should now test your class more thoroughly, ideally using
EqualsTester
from guava-testlib.
Best practice: mark your underriding methods final
to make it clear to future
readers that these methods aren't overridden by AutoValue.
Note that this also works if the underriding method was defined in one of your abstract class's supertypes. If this is the case and you want AutoValue to override it, you can "re-abstract" the method in your own class:
@AutoValue
class PleaseOverrideExample extends SuperclassThatDefinesToString {
...
// cause AutoValue to generate this even though the superclass has it
@Override public abstract String toString();
}
Just do it! AutoValue doesn't actually care. This best practice item may be relevant.
Suppose your value class has an extra field that shouldn't be included in
equals
or hashCode
computations.
If this is because it is a derived value based on other properties, see How do I memoize derived properties?.
Otherwise, first make certain that you really want to do this. It is often, but not always, a mistake. Remember that libraries will treat two equal instances as absolutely interchangeable with each other. Whatever information is present in this extra field could essentially "disappear" when you aren't expecting it, for example when your value is stored and retrieved from certain collections.
If you're sure, here is how to do it:
@AutoValue
abstract class IgnoreExample {
static IgnoreExample create(String normalProperty, String ignoredProperty) {
IgnoreExample ie = new AutoValue_IgnoreExample(normalProperty);
ie.ignoredProperty = ignoredProperty;
return ie;
}
abstract String normalProperty();
private String ignoredProperty; // sadly, it can't be `final`
final String ignoredProperty() {
return ignoredProperty;
}
}
Note that this means the field is also ignored by toString
; to AutoValue
it simply doesn't exist.
AutoValue will recognize every abstract accessor method whether it is defined directly in your own hand-written class or in a supertype.
There's nothing to it: just add type parameters to your class and to your call to the generated constructor.
Just add implements Serializable
or the @GwtCompatible(serializable = true)
annotation (respectively) to your hand-written class; it (as well as any
serialVersionUID
) will be duplicated on the generated class, and you'll be
good to go.
This is not currently supported; however any annotations on your hand-written abstract accessor methods will also appear on the generated implementations of these methods.
Most users should never have the need to programmatically create "fake"
annotation instances. But if you do, using @AutoValue
in the usual way will
fail because the Annotation.hashCode
specification is incompatible with
AutoValue's behavior.
However, we've got you covered anyway! Suppose this annotation definition:
public @interface Named {
String value();
}
All you need is this:
public class Names {
@AutoAnnotation public static Named named(String value) {
return new AutoAnnotation_Names_named(value);
}
}
For more details, see the AutoAnnotation
javadoc.
You can't; AutoValue only generates immutable value classes.
Note that giving value semantics to a mutable type is widely considered a questionable practice in the first place. Equal instances of a value class are treated as interchangeable, but they can't truly be interchangeable if one might be mutated and the other not.
AutoValue intentionally does not provide this feature. It is better for you to
roll your own comparison logic using the new methods added to
Comparator
in Java 8,
or ComparisonChain
from Guava.
Since these mechanisms are easy to use, require very little code, and give you the flexibility you need, there's really no way for AutoValue to improve on them!
Go right ahead! AutoValue will generate code that acts on the values stored the array, not the object identity of the array itself, which is (with virtual certainty) what you want. Heed the warnings given above about mutable properties.
This is not allowed. Object arrays are very badly-behaved and unlike primitive
arrays, they can be replaced with a proper List
implementation for very little
added cost.
If it's important to accept an object array at construction time, refer to the first example shown here.
This ability is intentionally not supported, because there is no way to do it correctly. See Effective Java, 2nd Edition Item 8: "Obey the general contract when overriding equals".
We're sorry. This is one of the rare and unfortunate restrictions AutoValue's approach places on your API. Your accessor methods don't have to be public, but they must be at least package-visible.
We're sorry. This is one of the rare restrictions AutoValue's approach places on your API. However, note that static factory methods are recommended over public constructors by Effective Java, Item 1.
Interfaces are not allowed. The only advantage of interfaces we're aware of is
that you can omit public abstract
from the methods. That's not much. On the
other hand, you would lose the immutability guarantee, and you'd also invite
more of the kind of bad behavior described in this best-practices
item. On balance, we don't think it's worth it.
Sometimes your class has properties that are derived from the ones that AutoValue implements. You'd typically implement them with a concrete method that uses the other properties:
@AutoValue
abstract class Foo {
abstract Bar barProperty();
String derivedProperty() {
return someFunctionOf(barProperty());
}
}
But what if someFunctionOf(Bar)
is expensive? You'd like to calculate it only
one time, then cache and reuse that value for all future calls. Normally,
thread-safe lazy initialization involves a lot of tricky boilerplate.
Instead, just write the derived-property accessor method as above, and
annotate it with @Memoized
. Then AutoValue will override that method to
return a stored value after the first call:
@AutoValue
abstract class Foo {
abstract Bar barProperty();
@Memoized
String derivedProperty() {
return someFunctionOf(barProperty());
}
}
Then your method will be called at most once, even if multiple threads attempt to access the property concurrently.
The annotated method must have the usual form of an accessor method, and may not
be abstract
, final
, or private
.
The stored value will not be used in the implementation of equals
, hashCode
,
or toString
.
If a @Memoized
method is also annotated with @Nullable
, then null
values
will be stored; if not, then the overriding method throws NullPointerException
when the annotated method returns null
.
You can also make your class remember and reuse the result of hashCode
,
toString
, or both, like this:
@AutoValue
abstract class Foo {
abstract Bar barProperty();
@Memoized
@Override
public abstract int hashCode();
@Memoized
@Override
public abstract String toString();
}