How intercept the set and change the value according with the type?

[gabryellr]

I have this object:

class CodeDto
 String code;

class UserDto
  CodeDto name;
  String city;
//getters and setters

now I wanna populate it with some fix values.

void test(){
Instancio.of(UserDto)
.set(field(UserDto::getCity), "Paris")
.set(field(CodeDto::getCode).within(scope(UserDto::getName)), "Edward")
//many others vars
.create();

Instancio.of(UserDto)
.set(field(UserDto::getCity), "othercity")
.set(field(CodeDto::getCode).within(scope(UserDto::getName)), "othername")
//many others vars
.create();

//so on...
}

Can I create a customGenerator/Setter to intercept the var type and fill it for me?

Ex:

class CodeDto implements CustomSetter<CodeDto> {

@override
   CodeDto fill(String value) {
    return CodeDto.builder().code(value).build();
}

So here I dont need to use scope everytime and check the type of var.

.set(field(UserDto::getName), "Edward") 

my issue today is I have a lot of vars in the same class that sometimes is CodeDto and sometimes is String so I need to check it before using a fix values to set the vars for each set.

I checked the supplies and customGenerator but I think the custom generator I cant pass fixed values.

[armandino]

@gabryellr if i understand correctly, your classes can contain multiple CodeDto fields:

class Example {
    CodeDto foo;
    CodeDto bar;
    //...
}

There's no workaround that i can think of that doesn't require using scopes. One option is to create a utility selector like this:

public class SelectCode {
    public static <T,R> TargetSelector of(ScopeableSelector selector) {
        final Scope scope = selector.toScope();
        return Select.field(CodeDto::getCode).within(scope);
    }
}

// Usage:
var result = Instancio.of(Example.class)
    .set(SelectCode.of(field(Example::getFoo)), "foo")
    .set(SelectCode.of(field(Example::getBar)), "bar")
    .create();

You could also name the method ofCode() instead of of() if you want to use it as a static import and make it even shorter.

Hope this solves your issue.

[gabryellr]

Perfect @armandino ! Thank you so much! we dont have it on the documentation, I could write it but I don't have the full knowledge about this property, its a new way for me :D

[armandino]

No worries! Btw i forgot to remove the <T, R>. I was trying a different approach but it's not needed for this one.