Support record parameter containers

[FroMage]

Also unify the parameter container detection code paths Make sure we do not turn record parameter containers into beans
For records, we store every contructor parameter in a local variable until we have enough to call the constructor via a generated static method.

• Fixes: Support constructor injection for RESTEasy Reactive multipart bodies  #19686

I'll open an issue with the work remaining, but this has already taken me too long to do I need to get back to the other stuff for now :(

[github-actions]

🙈 The PR is closed and the preview is expired.

[FroMage]

Naturally, the TCK had to fail…

[FroMage]

Now this is interesting. It fails because the TCK has an Application class limiting the set of classes:

public class AppConfig extends Application {

    public java.util.Set<java.lang.Class<?>> getClasses() {
        Set<Class<?>> resources = new HashSet<Class<?>>();
        resources.add(Resource.class);
        resources.add(RuntimeExceptionMapper.class);
        resources.add(WebApplicationExceptionMapper.class);
        return resources;
    }
}

The javadoc for getClasses says:

Get a set of root resource, provider and feature classes. The default life-cycle for resource class instances is per-request. The default life-cycle for providers (registered directly or via a feature) is singleton.

And our (new unified) parameter container scanning respects this to exclude the bean params. I don't think bean params fall within the scope of "resource, provider or feature" so I think they should not be filtered out…

[geoand]

I don't think bean params fall within the scope of "resource, provider or feature" so I think they should not be filtered out

Agreed

[FroMage]

Go back to PTO man ;)

I'm just thinking out loud.

[quarkus-bot]

Status for workflow Quarkus Documentation CI

This is the status report for running Quarkus Documentation CI on commit 9206f88.

✅ The latest workflow run for the pull request has completed successfully.

It should be safe to merge provided you have a look at the other checks in the summary.

Warning

There are other workflow runs running, you probably need to wait for their status before merging.

[quarkus-bot]

Status for workflow Quarkus CI

This is the status report for running Quarkus CI on commit 9206f88.

✅ The latest workflow run for the pull request has completed successfully.

It should be safe to merge provided you have a look at the other checks in the summary.

You can consult the Develocity build scans.

[geoand]

Very nice!