Java byte[] field generated as int instead of ByteArray on the Flex side

[Dr.Drane]

Aloha!

My byte[] field:

    @Lob
    @Basic(fetch = FetchType.LAZY)
    @Column(name = "source", columnDefinition = "BLOB NOT NULL")
    @NotNull
    private byte[] source; 

is generated as

    public var source:int; 

on the Flex side.

File a bug or am I just being stupid again?

Thanks and great work so far on the project!

[jeremyg484]

I assume you're talking about Roo-generated code?

The type mappings are based on the tables found here:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/LiveCycl...ffdUpdate.html

Oddly, it shows that:
- flash.utils.ByteArray maps to byte[] when going from ActionScript to Java
- java.lang.Byte and byte[] map to int when going from Java to ActionScript
- java.lang.Byte[] maps to flash.utils.ByteArray when going from Java to ActionScript

Clearly something's not quite right there. I haven't tested to see if it will correctly map byte[] to flash.utils.ByteArray in practice. If it does, that definitely seems to make more sense, and a Jira would indeed be appropriate.

[Dr.Drane]

I assume you're talking about Roo-generated code?

The type mappings are based on the tables found here:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/LiveCycl...ffdUpdate.html

Oddly, it shows that:
- flash.utils.ByteArray maps to byte[] when going from ActionScript to Java
- java.lang.Byte and byte[] map to int when going from Java to ActionScript
- java.lang.Byte[] maps to flash.utils.ByteArray when going from Java to ActionScript

Clearly something's not quite right there. I haven't tested to see if it will correctly map byte[] to flash.utils.ByteArray in practice. If it does, that definitely seems to make more sense, and a Jira would indeed be appropriate.

Indeed a Roo project.

So I could work around using java.lang.Byte[] instead of byte[], nice to hear!

I created: https://jira.springsource.org/browse/ROOFLEX-24