We Keep Coding

guice multiple bindings for a single constant

I have a java app that uses guice to do configuration.. I dont think this is what it is intended for but its what has been done and I only need to make a small change so I would prefer not to remove guice.
Basically, java properties are bound to variables, I want to bind some to an environmental variables or to a java property.
This is what I currently have
bindConstant().annotatedWith(Names.named("value")).to(properties.getProperty("java.property.value"));
this is what I would like to do
bindConstant().annotatedWith(Names.named("value")).to(System.getenv("JAVA_PROPERTY_VALUE"));
Is there a way to combine the two? I cannot do both. Or, is this just a default and I basically have what I need already? ie if I do bindConstant to System.getenv that value will be used unless its overwritten in the properties file (in my case the string constant is not the full property name so I am unsure how it works now).
I really do not know much about how guice works, I believe an injector is created where this code is and later used to do things like...
#Inject(optional = true)
#Named("value)
private String value;
I basically want that value to default to the one in the properties file, but be overridden by the env property value if its present.
I have tried simply using the env var value if it exists otherwise the property value, ie
bindConstant().annotatedWith(Names.named("value")).to(System.getenv(envVarName) != null && !System.getenv(envVarName).trim().isEmpty() ? System.getenv(envVarName) : properties.getProperty(propertyName));
Which works as expected when the environmental variable is defined and the property is not defined, but when both are defined the property is always used.
Which just leads me to the fact that I know very little about guice and how it works, I have in code a very explicit binding between the property name and this method, but, it just seems to be a default value, something after that is overwriting my value with the one from the property file.

This is super basic, but it's how we do things:
get Properties (sys.properties)
some.random.prop=localhost
iterate through System.getEnv() overriding all the Properties
// Convert SOME_RANDOM_PROP to some.random.prop
properties.put(parseKey(entry.getKey()), entry.getValue());
Now your properties should be defaulted to app.properties and overwritten with matching env.properties, then just bind all he properties.
Names.bindProperties(binder(), properties);
The caveat here is that now System.getEnv() pointless, but since you're using Guice for all your injections this shouldn't really be an issue.

Property #value Spring

In spring, we can use #value annotation to refer a property value that is defined in the property file. In this approach, the way it would be something like
To have a separate property file and define the property name and value
To list this property class path in a spring config file
Finally referring the value in a class with #value annotations as
#value("{key_name}") String abc;
Other hand , we can try simply define that property value as a constant in the class something like the below and use it in the class.
public static final String key_name = "1q2w3e";
Since we have this simple approach, why we are using #value annotation approach as defined above.
Please help me to understand in detailed about it.

Using configuration values from external sources (e.g. property files) has many advantages. Some of them:
You can change the configuration without recompiling your code.
You can have multiple instances of the same binary-code running with different configuration values.
Configuration values can not only come from property-files that are bundled with your application, but from different sources like system-properties, environment-values, a database or any other custom source.
As a general rule only use constant values for things that will never change like the value of PI.

There's a big disadvantage in using the second method. Think of a scenario where you changed the language. If you were relying on the first approach you'd have to go through each class and change the value assigned to key_name. Now, if you were using the second method you'd only have to change the value assigned to key_name in one place, and that's in the properties file which is much simpler and make things more manageable.

Getting and Setting key-value Properties

I have something like:
Properties props = new Properties();
// This type of key-value property is in several code lines
props.put("mail.transport.protocol", settings.getSmtpProtocol());
In my code, props is accessed at several places. And each time, I need to access some property by its string key. Recently, I made a small code change in one of these key strings, and the key mismatch created a havoc.
What should be the correct design to avoid this kind of problem in my code base, assuming it increases in size and complexity in near future? Following options that I can think of, but not sure what should be the best way:
Instead of writing keys as bare strings like "mail.transport.protocol", "mail.smtp.host", "mail.smtp.port" at several places in code, have them stored in a class? And unit test whether appropriate class variable is added into properties or not?
Should I refactor props to another class [with only my required properties] alltogether, given props is get/set in many code lines already?
Have key strings as it is in props and get the "keys" as unit tested? But, keys are written several times as bare strings.

Create a separate properties file. say mail.properties.
This file holds all key value pairs. In future if somebody wants to change any of the properties, he can just update this properties file instead of changing java classes.
Then create a Java class to load all of these properties and create public static constants for each of the properties in that class.
Use the above constants where ever you want to use them.

Java .properties files as strongly typed classes

Is there way to get properties files as strongly typed classes?
I guess there are code generators but doing it with annotations would be much cooler.
What I mean is;
foo.properties file
keyFoo = valuefoo
keyBar = valuebar
maybe with
#properties(file="foo.properties")
class foo { }
becomes
class foo {
String getKeyFoo() { }
String getKeyBar() { }
}
if not shall I start an open source project for that?
ADDITION TO QUESTION;
Think we have a foo.properties file with let say more than 10 entries;
and think it is used as a simple configuration file. What I believe is that this configuration entries should be provided as a configuration class with related getXXX methods to other parts of the design. Then rest of the system accesses the configuration via provided class instead of dealing with key names and don't need to bother where configuration comes. Then you can replace this class with a mock when you are testing callers and dependency to file system goes away. On the other hand it is really nice to
get all entries in a strongly typed fashion.
So this issue is a code generation issue behind the scenes, it is nothing related to runtime. But code generation with an external something instead of annotations didn't seemed nice to me. Although I am not very much familiar with annotations, I guess this could be achieved (but I'll keep in mind that annotations can not generate classes as McDowell points)

There are countless of framework that achieve that for XML with various degree of configuration needed. The standard one bundled with Java is JaxB but it is not exactly a one liner xml persistence framework ...
The problem is that using properties file will only works better than XML (or JSON, ...) on the most trivial classes. When the class become a bit more complex, the properties file will become a nightmare. Another problem is that with trivial classes - there is not much difference between Xml and properties.
That means that the scope of the project will be rather limited. Mostly useful for project having loads of simple properties files.
In big application I worked with, strongly-type reading of properties file is done quite often using a simple factory-method.
Foo foo = Foo.loadFrom("foo.properties");
class Foo {
static Foo loadFrom(String fileName) {
Properties props = new Properties();
props.load(...);
Foo foo = new Foo();
foo.setKeyFoo(props.get("KeyFoo"));
...
return foo;
}
...
}

There is a somewhat similar project for doing configuration as statically typed files. It requires to declare an interface, but it fills in the implementation itself:
public interface AppConfig extends Config {
long getTimeout ();
URL getURL ();
Class getHandlerClass ();
}

The Annotation Processing Tool (apt) cannot modify classes (though it can create new ones). In order to modify the class at compile time, you'd probably need to edit the AST (as Project Lombok does). The simplest approach would probably be to generate the classes and then use the generated library as a dependency for other code.

Yet another way is to use a data binding framework that does this. Even one that does not seem to directly support that could work: for example, Jackson JSON processor would allow this to be done by something like:
ObjectMapper m = new ObjectMapper();
MyBean bean = m.convertValue(properties, MyBean.class);
// (note: requires latest code from trunk; otherwise need to write first, read back)
which works as long as entries in Properties map match logical bean properties, and String values can be converted to matching underlying values.

Something like JFig (ugly IMO), Commons Configuration or EasyConf?

If you want to do it statically, its a code generation problem that may be solved quite easily (for each item in file, produce a new getXXX method).
But if you want this at runtime, then you have the problem of having your code referencing method that did not exists at compile time; I don't think it can be done.
(Note that if you are looking for a project idead, the reverse, having an interface with accessor method and annotation, and an implementation generated at runtime, that relies on the annotated methods, can be done.)

The OP would like to map a property file to a Java API such that each named property in the file corresponds to a similarly named getter method in the API. I presume that an application would then use this API to get property values without having to use property name strings.
The conceptual problem is that a property file is fundamentally not a statically typed entity. Each time someone edits a property file they could add new properties, and hence change the "type" of the property file ... and by implication, the signature of the corresponding API. If we checked that there were no unexpected properties when the Java app loaded the properties file, then we've got an explicit dynamic type-check. If we don't check for unexpected (e.g. misnamed) properties, we've got a source of errors. Things get even messier if you want the types of property values to be something other than a String.
The only way you could do this properly would be to invent the concept of a schema for a property file that specified the property names and the types of the property values. Then implement a property file editor that ensures that the user cannot add properties that conflict with the schema.
And at this point we should recognize that a better solution would be to use XML as the property file representation, an XML schema driven editor for editing property files, and JAXP or something like it to map the property file to Java APIs.

I think this will solve your problem
I have written on this property framework for the last year.
It will provide of multiple ways to load properties, and have them strongly typed as well.
Have a look at http://sourceforge.net/projects/jhpropertiestyp/
It is open sourced and fully documented
Here is my short description from SourceForge:
JHPropertiesTyped will give the developer strongly typed properties. Easy to integrate in existing projects. Handled by a large series for property types. Gives the ability to one-line initialize properties via property IO implementations. Gives the developer the ability to create own property types and property io's. Web demo is also available, screenshots shown above. Also have a standard implementation for a web front end to manage properties, if you choose to use it.
Complete documentation, tutorial, javadoc, faq etc is a available on the project webpage.

Java: dynamic properties

Ladies & Gentlemen,
I´m new to Java, forgive me if it´s obvious, but I haven´t found much about it.
I´d like to create dynamic properties (variables) for a class at runtime (define an object that can be altered at runtime by adding or changing properties and methods).
Reason: I want to store a data model in GAE that can be extended dynamically after compilation of the app (yes, the DataStore allows that). What properties should be added are stored in the DataStore as well (It´s like using Robots to built Robots...funny).
Python allows me to add properties at Runtime. Groovy seems to allow that, too. The only thing in the "pure" Java world indicating in that direction seems to be "Dynamic Proxies".
But I couldn´t figure out yet if they do the trick.

Java doesn't have the capability to dynamically add properties. Nor does it have the ability to dynamically create classes at runtime or change them at runtime. Java is strongly and statically typed. The best you can do is put such properties into a Map or similar.
Edit: Ok, apparently some clarifications are in order. The OP specifically mentioned GAE, which none of these methods will work on but I'll mention them since some seem to take exception to their absence.
The Java Compiler API (Java 6+) allows you to compile Java classes at runtime. Technically you could write out a Java source file to look exactly how you want, compile it and load it.
Java bytecode libraries can rewrite classes at runtime. This is used by such libraries as JPA (and others). You could modify classes this way.
What the OP is referring to however is a) in reference to working on GAE and b) more in the order of how Javascript allows you to modify classes or particular instances at runtime by dynamically adding, removing or change properties. Java certainly doesn't do this and specifically doesn't on the GAE.
The above is not an exception to this just like casting a class to char * in C++ so you can read private members doesn't mean C++ doesn't have private members. You're essentially bypassing the Java runtime with both of these methods even though they're part of Java.

Java doesn't support it. Your best bet is to store/manage in some external datastore which you can access from inside the Java code. As a basic and builtin example, you can make use of java.util.Properties API which you load on every request, or cache and reload at timed intervals, or reload programmatically. You can then store the key-value pairs in a .properties file which you just place in the classpath. Here is a Sun tutorial about the subject.
A properties file can look like
key1=value1
key2=value2
key3=value3
If you put it in the classpath, then you can load it as
Properties properties = new Properties();
ClassLoader classLoader = Thread.currentThread().getContextClassLoader();
properties.load(classLoader.getResourceAsStream("file.properties"));
String key1 = properties.getProperty("key1"); // value1
Other alternatives are for example XML files (which you can access using any Java XML API) or just a database (which you can access using JDBC API).

I don't know if this is an option on GAE (I didn't checked the restrictions) and if this will suit your needs but maybe have a look at the BeanGenerator class from CGLIB (an alternative to the ugly DynaBean from BeanUtils). Quoting "Death to DynaBeans" (have a look at the post):
Not one to let my CGLIB Golden Hammer
go to waste, I have checked
in a BeanGenerator class into CVS. You
use it like so:
BeanGenerator bg = new BeanGenerator();
bg.addProperty("foo", Double.TYPE);
bg.addProperty("bar", String.class);
Object bean = bg.create();
The generated class is an real
JavaBean, which means you can use
standard bean utilities. This includes
all of the classes in the
net.sf.cglib.beans package
(BeanCopier, BeanMap, and BulkBean).
Do your part to end the tyranny of
DynaBeans!

It is possible using Dynamic Proxies. It is also possible to do this on GAE.
First create the class "SomeObject" that exposes methods to get and set property values (i.e. getProperty(name) and setProperty(name, value)).
Then, create an interface "PropertyModel" that contains the methods that you would like your generated objects to have.
Call TransparentProxy.newInstance(someObjectInstance, MyPropertyModel.class) to create a dynamic proxy.
What happens is that Java will extend your object someObjectInstance with the specified interface (btw. you could specify more than one). When you call a method on the proxy object, the method invocation will be redirected to the "invoke(...)" method defined below, you'll need to modify that code to handle both getters and setters and include some exception handling etc. But in general, this is the way dynamic proxies work in Java.
public class TransparentProxy implements InvocationHandler
{
private final SomeObject someObject;
private TransparentProxy(SomeObject someObject)
{
this.someObject = someObject;
}
public static Object newInstance(SomeObject someObject,
Class<? extends PropertyModel> propertyModel)
{
return Proxy.newProxyInstance(someObject.getClass().getClassLoader(),
new Class[] { propertyModel }, new TransparentProxy(someObject));
}
public Object invoke(Object proxy, Method method, Object[] args)
throws Throwable
{
return this.someObject.getProperty(method.getName());
}
}

There is DynaClass library that can be used this way to dynamically create JavaBeans
Map<Object, Object> properties = new HashMap<Object, Object>();
roperties.put("title", "The Italian Job");
roperties.put("dateOfRelease", "new GregorianCalendar(1969, 0, 1).getTime()");
Object movieBean = BeanCreator.createBeanFromMap(properties);