[BUG]Order in collection is not preserved while using useImmutableCollections option

[Paweł Łabaj]

When a record has a component of the type that is the Set implementation keeping the order, the order is lost when using useImmutableCollections = true option.

Following test shows the problem:

import io.soabase.recordbuilder.core.RecordBuilder;

import java.util.Set;

@RecordBuilder
@RecordBuilder.Options(useImmutableCollections = true)
record OrderedSetRecord(Set<String> orderedSet) {}

import org.junit.jupiter.api.Test;

import java.util.LinkedHashSet;

import static org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat;

public class TestOrderedSetsBuilder {

    @Test
    void shouldKeepOrderInSetIfProvided() {
        // given
        var orderedSet = new LinkedHashSet<String>();
        orderedSet.add("C");
        orderedSet.add("B");
        orderedSet.add("A");

        // when
        var record = OrderedSetRecordBuilder.builder().orderedSet(orderedSet).build();

        // then
        assertThat(record.orderedSet()).containsExactly("C", "B", "A");
    }
}

Order is lost in java.util.Set#copyOf method used in generated __set method.

One of possible solution is te generate __set method as follow:

private static <T> Set<T> __set(Collection<? extends T> o) {
        return (o != null) ?  Collections.unmodifiableSet((Set<T>) o) : Set.of();
    }

[Johannes]

unmodifiableSet unfortunately only creates a view on the still modifiable original set. Meaning that from a reference to the underlying set the new "unmodifiable" set could change. This is ofc not desirable.

[Paweł Łabaj]

In most cases, reference to the original collection is not being kept and collection from the record is used.

Another possible solution would be to treat java.util.LinkedHashSet or com.google.common.collect.ImmutableSet in a special way.

[Paweł Łabaj]

Introducing the useUnmodifiableCollections option works for me. However, it didn't solve the issue reported here.
Possibly checking for specialized interfaces like SortedSet, etc. (see #151 ) is the solution.

[Jordan Zimmerman]

@pawellabaj could you provide a PR?

[Paweł Łabaj]

@Randgalt , I'm thinking of it.

Do you consider introducing Guava as a dependency to your project?

[Jordan Zimmerman]

Do you consider introducing Guava as a dependency to your project

No - we shouldn't do that. We could, however, do FQPN string comparisons if needed.

[Paweł Łabaj]

@Randgalt have you thought about introducing a plugins/extensions mechanism?
Extensions with the usage of any library could be implemented.

[Jordan Zimmerman]

At this point I'd like to limit any new customizations. This library ran into a lot of problems with some of the recently added customizations.