Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information.

For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request.

fixes #5621

Thanks for the submission. We're taking a look. This one may require some additional tests to be added.

@MarkDuckworth thank you! I've added some fixes

Summary of this PR:

1. For getters, it looks pretty straightforward, by simply adding the method.isBridge() check to shouldIncludeGetter(). However, the situation with setters is more complex.

2. For setters, there was already an existing check to determine whether a setter, considered as a ‘duplicate’, is a base method of the corresponding setter. This logic works well for non-generic setters. But, for example, setValue(String value) is not technically overriding setValue(T value) (it’s done by the corresponding bridge method), while, semantically, it is. Therefore, I’ve decided not to exclude bridge methods in the shouldIncludeSetter() step, but handle them differently and then perform the overriding check with both the subclass setter and its bridge method.

3. Another issue is that when the subclass setter is annotated with @Exclude, the corresponding superclass setter doesn't get this annotation automatically. Such superclass setters are not filtered out by shouldIncludeSetter(), but they shouldn’t be included since the three methods – setter in subclass, its bridge method if present, and setter in superclass – form a single semantic unit in this context. Therefore, method.isAnnotationPresent(Exclude.class) has been excluded from the shouldIncludeSetter() check. Instead, these methods are marked as excluded and removed from the setters map after the traversal. As a result, this unannotated superclass setter is filtered out during the isSetterOverride() check, and no setters excluded on a semantic basis are used in bean construction.

Hi @vladd-g ,

Thank you again for your contribution again! Sorry about the late review. I will take a look at this PR in the coming weeks.

Hi @cherylEnkidu,

Thank you! For your convenience, I've left some notes here. If any questions arise during the review, please feel free to ask.

Hi @cherylEnkidu,

Happy to hear that! Yes, absolutely.

I understand the delay, that's completely fine. Thank you for the review and for merging the PR!