Provide contract choice metadata #15116

fayi-da · 2022-09-28T07:58:15Z

CHANGELOG_BEGIN
CHANGELOG_END

CHANGELOG_BEGIN CHANGELOG_END

S11001001 · 2022-09-28T19:18:07Z

...port/java/bindings/src/main/java/com/daml/ledger/javaapi/data/codegen/ContractCompanion.java

@@ -44,7 +46,8 @@ protected ContractCompanion(
      String templateClassName,
      Identifier templateId,
      Function<String, Id> newContractId,
-      Function<DamlRecord, Data> fromValue) {
+      Function<DamlRecord, Data> fromValue,
+      List<ChoiceMetadata<Data, ?, ?>> choices) {


Here's what I suggest we do with this thing:

add a Marker type parameter to ContractTypeCompanion. For InterfaceCompanion it should be I, for ContractCompanion it should be Data

Pass choices along to super (substituting Marker for Data in the type)

transform it to the instance variable public final Map<String, ChoiceMetadata<Marker, ?, ?>> choices (see ContractDecoder for an example that makes it safe and immutable)

That would be reasonable for this PR; for interfaces we can either include them in this PR or do a separate PR to supply them.

fayi-da · 2022-09-29T14:47:48Z

.../java/bindings/src/main/java/com/daml/ledger/javaapi/data/codegen/ContractTypeCompanion.java

 /** The commonality between {@link ContractCompanion} and {@link InterfaceCompanion}. */
 public abstract class ContractTypeCompanion {
  /** The full template ID of the template or interface that defined this companion. */
  public final Identifier TEMPLATE_ID;
+  //TODO: Need to figure out the right type params here
+  private final List<ChoiceMetadata<?, ?, ?>> choices;


@S11001001 I was about to ask about this and saw your comment from yesterday. I think adding that Marker type will solve my problem

We're going to change it again in #15125, so might as well get started now.

With #14037 I was thinking "well I don't have a use for this type parameter yet on ContractTypeCompanion, so I shouldn't add it until we have a use for it".

But I think in retrospect this was the wrong decision, and compatibility considerations actually make it better to preemptively type-parameterize such newly-introduced types to our public API, if we have in mind a use for them later.

The reasoning for the extra tparam in #15125 is a lot less obvious, so I doubt I would have correctly anticipated the need for that one, but certainly having Marker already would have been wise.

Of course this change in thinking is why ChoiceMetadata has its third tparam; we don't use it in this PR, but I'm fairly sure we have a good use for it, so we should just have it so as to make compatibility better.

# Conflicts: # language-support/java/bindings/src/main/java/com/daml/ledger/javaapi/data/codegen/ContractTypeCompanion.java # language-support/java/bindings/src/main/java/com/daml/ledger/javaapi/data/codegen/InterfaceCompanion.java # language-support/java/codegen/src/main/scala/com/digitalasset/daml/lf/codegen/backend/java/inner/ContractIdClass.scala # language-support/java/codegen/src/main/scala/com/digitalasset/daml/lf/codegen/backend/java/inner/InterfaceClass.scala # language-support/java/codegen/src/main/scala/com/digitalasset/daml/lf/codegen/backend/java/inner/TemplateClass.scala

# Conflicts: # language-support/java/codegen/src/main/scala/com/digitalasset/daml/lf/codegen/backend/java/inner/TemplateClass.scala

fayi-da · 2022-10-05T10:38:30Z

...egen/src/main/scala/com/digitalasset/daml/lf/codegen/backend/java/inner/InterfaceClass.scala

+              interfaceName,
+              packagePrefixes,
+              interface.choices,
+              withPrefixes = false, // TODO: remove in #15154


Removing this in the next ticket

ray-roestenburg-da · 2022-10-05T11:38:15Z

.../java/bindings/src/main/java/com/daml/ledger/javaapi/data/codegen/ContractTypeCompanion.java

@@ -5,18 +5,22 @@

 import com.daml.ledger.javaapi.data.Identifier;

+import java.util.List;
+
 /** The commonality between {@link ContractCompanion} and {@link InterfaceCompanion}. */
 public abstract class ContractTypeCompanion<Maker, Data> {


Not clear what this is, let's discuss with @S11001001

Please rename Maker to Marker as well, this was a typo.

@ray-roestenburg-da ContractCompanion represents templates, InterfaceCompanion interfaces, and the union of the two...

(from other discussion) For an interface, the type argument to ContractId (Marker) is different from the payload type i.e. interface view (Data); for a template they are the same.

S11001001

Run ./fmt.sh --diff in the root to fix the Java format.

Additionally, sample CHOICE_* fields should be documented in docs/source/app-dev/bindings-java/codegen.rst

near the definition of COMPANION for templates
near the definition of field INTERFACE for interfaces

The details of the initializer can be elided; what matters is that it is clear that such fields are defined, what their types are, and users can refer to Javadoc for further information.

S11001001 · 2022-10-05T14:41:39Z

.../java/bindings/src/main/java/com/daml/ledger/javaapi/data/codegen/ContractTypeCompanion.java

@@ -5,18 +5,22 @@

 import com.daml.ledger.javaapi.data.Identifier;

+import java.util.List;
+
 /** The commonality between {@link ContractCompanion} and {@link InterfaceCompanion}. */
 public abstract class ContractTypeCompanion<Maker, Data> {


Please rename Maker to Marker as well, this was a typo.

.../java/bindings/src/main/java/com/daml/ledger/javaapi/data/codegen/ContractTypeCompanion.java

S11001001 · 2022-10-05T14:44:12Z

.../java/bindings/src/main/java/com/daml/ledger/javaapi/data/codegen/ContractTypeCompanion.java

@@ -5,18 +5,22 @@

 import com.daml.ledger.javaapi.data.Identifier;

+import java.util.List;
+
 /** The commonality between {@link ContractCompanion} and {@link InterfaceCompanion}. */
 public abstract class ContractTypeCompanion<Maker, Data> {


@ray-roestenburg-da ContractCompanion represents templates, InterfaceCompanion interfaces, and the union of the two...

...support/java/bindings/src/main/java/com/daml/ledger/javaapi/data/codegen/ChoiceMetadata.java

S11001001

Additionally,

test that you can use a CHOICE_* field to retrieve the name of a choice in codegen output
test that the choices maps' keysets in a COMPANION and an INTERFACE correspond to expected sets of choice names

carrielaben-da

Docs portion looks good.

S11001001

Very nice. 👍 Feel free to merge after addressing these comments.

docs/source/app-dev/bindings-java/codegen.rst

.../src/test/scala/com/digitalasset/daml/lf/codegen/backend/java/ChoiceMetadataFieldsSpec.scala

CHANGELOG_BEGIN - Add new representation of a choice, ChoiceMetadata. - Generated templates and interfaces now include fields for each available choice. These fields will have a ChoiceMetadata type and will be called CHOICE_N, where N represents the choices' name. CHANGELOG_END

#13766 initial implementation of choice metadata for templates

b5aa1ac

CHANGELOG_BEGIN CHANGELOG_END

S11001001 reviewed Sep 28, 2022

View reviewed changes

#13766 initial implementation of choice metadata for interfaces

b302e65

fayi-da commented Sep 29, 2022

View reviewed changes

#13766 Add marker type to ContractTypeCompanion

bdc9c47

S11001001 mentioned this pull request Oct 3, 2022

add Update<R> to exercise and create method result types in Java codegen #14312

Closed

fayi-da added 5 commits October 4, 2022 16:04

#13766 Minor type fix

5f0541a

Merge branch 'main' into 14329-add-choice-metadata

bc8d25c

# Conflicts: # language-support/java/codegen/src/main/scala/com/digitalasset/daml/lf/codegen/backend/java/inner/TemplateClass.scala

Cleanup after merge with main

3085f1f

Temporary fix for package prefixes

7e10d82

fayi-da marked this pull request as ready for review October 5, 2022 10:37

fayi-da requested a review from ray-roestenburg-da as a code owner October 5, 2022 10:37

fayi-da commented Oct 5, 2022

View reviewed changes

ray-roestenburg-da reviewed Oct 5, 2022

View reviewed changes

S11001001 reviewed Oct 5, 2022

View reviewed changes

Format java files, rename Maker -> ContractType in ContractTypeCompanion

8255578

S11001001 assigned fayi-da Oct 5, 2022

S11001001 added component/java-ecosystem Java development experience team/ledger-clients Related to the Ledger Clients team's components. ledger clients facade enriching the ledger API by bindings/codegen, JSON API, custom view labels Oct 5, 2022

Add documentation and tests

dacf544

fayi-da requested review from stefanobaghino-da, a team and hrischuk-da as code owners October 7, 2022 15:51

carrielaben-da reviewed Oct 7, 2022

View reviewed changes

S11001001 approved these changes Oct 7, 2022

View reviewed changes

fayi-da added 2 commits October 7, 2022 17:30

Update docs and cleanup tests

2a9d89d

fayi-da enabled auto-merge (squash) October 7, 2022 16:50

ray-roestenburg-da approved these changes Oct 7, 2022

View reviewed changes

fayi-da added 2 commits October 7, 2022 19:45

Update formatting

13c13cb

Update formatting

e5bc31f

fayi-da merged commit d117040 into main Oct 7, 2022

fayi-da deleted the 14329-add-choice-metadata branch October 7, 2022 20:54

chunlokling-da mentioned this pull request Oct 11, 2022

Add Update<R> to exercise and create method result types in Java codegen #15193

Merged

4 tasks

This was referenced Oct 12, 2022

Provide contract choice metadata as constants in contract's class #14329

Closed

rename ChoiceMetadata to Choice #15281

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Provide contract choice metadata #15116

Provide contract choice metadata #15116

fayi-da commented Sep 28, 2022 •

edited by S11001001

Loading

S11001001 Sep 28, 2022

fayi-da Sep 29, 2022 •

edited

Loading

S11001001 Sep 29, 2022

S11001001 Sep 29, 2022

fayi-da Oct 5, 2022

ray-roestenburg-da Oct 5, 2022

S11001001 Oct 5, 2022

S11001001 Oct 5, 2022

S11001001 Oct 5, 2022

S11001001 left a comment •

edited by fayi-da

Loading

S11001001 Oct 5, 2022

S11001001 Oct 5, 2022

S11001001 left a comment •

edited by fayi-da

Loading

carrielaben-da left a comment

S11001001 left a comment

Provide contract choice metadata #15116

Provide contract choice metadata #15116

Conversation

fayi-da commented Sep 28, 2022 • edited by S11001001 Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

fayi-da Sep 29, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

S11001001 left a comment • edited by fayi-da Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

S11001001 left a comment • edited by fayi-da Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

carrielaben-da left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

S11001001 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

fayi-da commented Sep 28, 2022 •

edited by S11001001

Loading

fayi-da Sep 29, 2022 •

edited

Loading

S11001001 left a comment •

edited by fayi-da

Loading

S11001001 left a comment •

edited by fayi-da

Loading