Merge branch '3.x' into 5405-map-format-shape-bug

Author: cowtowncoder

release-notes/CREDITS

@@ -127,7 +127,15 @@ Oliver Drotbohm (@odrotbohm)
  * Contributed fix for #4629: `@JsonIncludeProperties` and `@JsonIgnoreProperties`
   ignored when deserializing Records
   [3.1.0]
-  
+ * Contributed fix for #5115: `@JsonUnwrapped` Record deserialization can't handle
+  name collision
+  [3.1.0]
+
+Viktor Szathmáry (@phraktle)
+ * Reported #5115: `@JsonUnwrapped` Record deserialization can't handle name collision
+ (reported by Viktor S)
+  [3.1.0]
+
 Hélios Gilles (@RoiSoleil)
  * Contributed #5413: Add/support forward reference resolution for array values
   [3.1.0]

release-notes/VERSION

@@ -24,6 +24,12 @@ Versions: 3.x (for earlier see VERSION-2.x)
   creator property" when deserializing JSON with dup property to single-property Record
  (reported by @sseelmann)
  (fix contributed by @JacksonJang)
+#5115: `@JsonUnwrapped` Record deserialization can't handle name collision
+ (reported by Viktor S)
+ (fix contributed by @JacksonJang)
+#5184: `@JsonIgnore` on record method applied to record matching field
+  at deserialization
+ (reported by @emouty)
 #5350: Add `DeserializationFeature.USE_NULL_FOR_MISSING_REFERENCE_VALUES` for
   selecting `null` vs "empty/absent" value when deserializing missing `Optional` value
 #5361: Fix Maven SBOM publishing (worked in 3.0.0-rc4 but not in rc5 or later)

src/main/java/tools/jackson/databind/introspect/POJOPropertiesCollector.java

@@ -1054,33 +1054,38 @@ private void _addCreatorParams(Map<String, POJOPropertyBuilder> props,
             final PropertyName explName = ctor.explicitName(i);
             PropertyName implName = ctor.implicitName(i);
             final boolean hasExplicit = (explName != null);
-            final POJOPropertyBuilder prop;
-
-            //  neither implicit nor explicit name?
-            if (!hasExplicit && (implName == null)) {
-                boolean isUnwrapping = _annotationIntrospector.findUnwrappingNameTransformer(_config, param) != null;
+            final boolean hasImplicit = (implName != null);
 
-                if (isUnwrapping) {
+            // First: check "Unwrapped" unless explicit name
+            if (!hasExplicit) {
+                var unwrapper = _annotationIntrospector.findUnwrappingNameTransformer(_config, param);
+                if (unwrapper != null) {
                     // If unwrapping, can use regardless of name; we will use a placeholder name
                     // anyway to try to avoid name conflicts.
                     PropertyName name = UnwrappedPropertyHandler.creatorParamName(param.getIndex());
-                    prop = _property(props, name);
+                    final POJOPropertyBuilder prop = _property(props, name);
                     prop.addCtor(param, name, false, true, false);
-                } else {
+                    creatorProps.add(prop);
+                    continue;
+                }
+                if (!hasImplicit) {
                     // Without name, cannot make use of this creator parameter -- may or may not
                     // be a problem, verified at a later point.
-                    prop = null;
+                    creatorProps.add(null);
+                    continue;
                 }
+            }
+
+            // 27-Dec-2019, tatu: [databind#2527] may need to rename according to field
+            final POJOPropertyBuilder prop;
+            if (hasImplicit) {
+                String n = _checkRenameByField(implName.getSimpleName());
+                implName = PropertyName.construct(n);
+                prop = _property(props, implName);
             } else {
-                // 27-Dec-2019, tatu: [databind#2527] may need to rename according to field
-                if (implName != null) {
-                    String n = _checkRenameByField(implName.getSimpleName());
-                    implName = PropertyName.construct(n);
-                }
-                prop = (implName == null)
-                        ? _property(props, explName) : _property(props, implName);
-                prop.addCtor(param, hasExplicit ? explName : implName, hasExplicit, true, false);
+                prop = _property(props, explName);
             }
+            prop.addCtor(param, hasExplicit ? explName : implName, hasExplicit, true, false);
             creatorProps.add(prop);
         }
         ctor.assignPropertyDefs(creatorProps);
@@ -1201,6 +1206,24 @@ else if (Boolean.TRUE.equals(_annotationIntrospector.hasAsValue(_config, m))) {
         // 27-Dec-2019, tatu: [databind#2527] may need to rename according to field
         implName = _checkRenameByField(implName);
         boolean ignore = _annotationIntrospector.hasIgnoreMarker(_config, m);
+        // 03-Dec-2025, tatu: [databind#5184]: Not the cleanest fix but here goes...
+        //  (why not clean? Ideally accessor reconciliation solved the issue, not
+        //  special case rule like done here)
+        // For Records, prevent "get"-prefix methods with @JsonIgnore from incorrectly
+        // affecting Record component fields (and thereby Creator parameters).
+        // For example, if getter method is "getValue()" with @JsonIgnore and there's a
+        // record component "value", the method should not cause the field to be ignored since
+        // the actual accessor is "value()".
+        // We check: is this a Record, does the method name NOT match the derived property name
+        // (indicating prefix was stripped), does the property already exist (from a record field),
+        // and does this method have @JsonIgnore?
+        if (_isRecordType && !nameExplicit && ignore && !implName.equals(m.getName())) {
+            POJOPropertyBuilder prop = props.get(implName);
+            if (prop != null && prop.hasField()) {
+                // Skip adding this getter to avoid its @JsonIgnore affecting the record field
+                return;
+            }
+        }
         _property(props, implName).addGetter(m, pn, nameExplicit, visible, ignore);
     }
 

src/test/java/tools/jackson/databind/records/tofix/RecordUnwrapped5115Test.java renamed to src/test/java/tools/jackson/databind/records/RecordUnwrapped5115Test.java

@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
-package tools.jackson.databind.records.tofix;
+package tools.jackson.databind.records;
 
 import org.junit.jupiter.api.Test;
 
 import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonUnwrapped;
+
 import tools.jackson.databind.ObjectMapper;
 import tools.jackson.databind.testutil.DatabindTestUtil;
-import tools.jackson.databind.testutil.failure.JacksonTestFailureExpected;
 
 import static org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertEquals;
 
@@ -62,7 +62,6 @@ void unwrappedRecordShouldRoundTripPass() throws Exception
         assertEquals(input, output);
     }
 
-    @JacksonTestFailureExpected
     @Test
     void unwrappedRecordShouldRoundTrip() throws Exception
     {

src/test/java/tools/jackson/databind/records/tofix/RecordWithJsonIgnoredMethod5184Test.java renamed to src/test/java/tools/jackson/databind/records/RecordWithJsonIgnoredMethod5184Test.java

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-package tools.jackson.databind.records.tofix;
+package tools.jackson.databind.records;
 
 import java.util.Optional;
 
@@ -8,7 +8,6 @@
 import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonProperty;
 import tools.jackson.databind.ObjectMapper;
 import tools.jackson.databind.testutil.DatabindTestUtil;
-import tools.jackson.databind.testutil.failure.JacksonTestFailureExpected;
 
 import static org.assertj.core.api.AssertionsForClassTypes.assertThat;
 
@@ -44,7 +43,7 @@ public Optional<String> getValue() {
 
     private static final ObjectMapper MAPPER = newJsonMapper();
 
-    @JacksonTestFailureExpected
+    // [databind#5184]
     @Test
     void should_deserialize_json_to_test_data() throws Exception {
         String json = """