objectbox / objectbox/objectbox-java
secondary name exists in binary,can it be removed?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Java
- Stars
- 4.6k
- Forks
- 311
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
I used @NameInDb to rename the field names in the DB, but after testing in the security department I found that the member names of the entity still exist in the binary. I changed the name in the entity again and objectbox still works. After using NameInDb, is the actual member name of the entity still valuable? For me, it takes extra space and leaks my actual mapped names of entity members, I really like objectbox, I'm trying to modify the generation tool, but no progress. Is there an easy way to configure it? I don't seem to find it in the documentation (maybe I'm missing something )
objectbox ver:3.1.1
work on android project
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the @NameInDb behavior in ObjectBox 3.1.1 and review the generator and Android documentation for configuration options affecting generated binaries. Determine whether retaining the entity member name is required or removable, then define whether the outcome should be documented guidance or a scoped generator change.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- android, java
- Domain
- databases, mobile
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100