Skip to content

Fix inner class naming in KSP to match KAPT behavior #1317

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Fix inner class naming in KSP to match KAPT behavior #1317

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+60 −1

Conversation

craftyworks
Copy link

Problem

When migrating from KAPT to KSP, inner class naming conventions differ:

  • KAPT: QOuterClass_InnerClass
  • KSP: QInnerClass

This breaks existing code that relies on KAPT naming conventions.

Solution

Modified QueryModelExtractor.queryClassName() to:

  1. Traverse parent class hierarchy using generateSequence
  2. Collect all class names from inner to outer
  3. Join with underscore separator to match KAPT behavior

Changes

  • Fixed: Inner class naming now matches KAPT exactly
  • Added: Comprehensive test coverage for nested scenarios
  • Maintained: Backward compatibility for top-level classes

Test Cases

  • ✅ Single level inner class: OuterClass.InnerClass → QOuterClass_InnerClass
  • ✅ Multi-level nesting: A.B.C → QA_B_C
  • ✅ Top-level classes unchanged: TopLevel → QTopLevel
  • ✅ Custom prefix/suffix support

Breaking Changes

None - this fixes compatibility issues rather than introducing them.

@craftyworks
Inner class naming in KSP to match KAPT behavior
a9422dc 
  - Change queryClassName generation to use underscore separator for nested classes
  - Maintains compatibility with existing KAPT-generated Q-classes
  - Add comprehensive test cases for inner class naming scenarios

  Fixes: Inner classes now generate QOuterClass_InnerClass instead of QInnerClass
  This ensures seamless migration from KAPT to KSP without breaking existing code.
@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 15, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 0.00%. Comparing base (a7692cf) to head (a9422dc).
⚠️ Report is 20 commits behind head on master.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...in/com/querydsl/ksp/codegen/QueryModelExtractor.kt 0.00% 6 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files 
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #1317    +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage    0.00%   0.00%            
=======================================
  Files         812     837    +25     
  Lines       31149   31484   +335     
  Branches     3536    3545     +9     
=======================================
- Misses      31149   31484   +335
Flag Coverage Δ
cubrid 0.00% <0.00%> (?)
db2 0.00% <0.00%> (?)
embedded 0.00% <0.00%> (?)
examples 0.00% <ø> (?)
firebird 0.00% <0.00%> (?)
mongodb 0.00% <0.00%> (?)
mysql 0.00% <0.00%> (?)
oracle 0.00% <0.00%> (?)
postgresql 0.00% <0.00%> (?)
test 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@velo velo requested a review from IceBlizz6 September 5, 2025 13:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@IceBlizz6 IceBlizz6 Awaiting requested review from IceBlizz6

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@craftyworks