Null coercion with `@JsonSetter` does not work with `java.lang.Record`

[cowtowncoder]

Looks like use of @JsonSetter(nulls=...) does not work with Records in 2.12.0.

Note that earlier report (#2970) turned out to be valid, but since I closed it earlier decided to file a separate one.

[cowtowncoder]

Oh boy. This gets deeper and deeper. But long and short of this is that there IS one specific work-around: name your constructor parameters and linkage works. For example:

    record RecordWithNonNullDefs(List<String> names,Map<String, Integer> agesByNames)
    {
        @JsonCreator
        public RecordWithNonNullDefs(
            @JsonProperty("name") @JsonSetter(nulls=Nulls.AS_EMPTY) List<String> names,
            @JsonProperty("agesByNames") @JsonSetter(nulls=Nulls.FAIL) Map<String, Integer> agesByNames)
        {
            this.names = names;
            this.agesByNames = agesByNames;
        }
    }

Not pretty but works. I'll see if this can be fixed more generally but this is the workaround for now.

[cowtowncoder]

Ok so the problem is as follows:

1. During initial POJOPropertiesCollector scan, only explicitly-annotated constructor parameters are located (no attention paid to Creator (constructor/factory) methods themselves, linked to method/field accessors
2. BasicBeanDescription is constructed
3. BeanDeserializerFactory (and/or BasicDeserializerFactory) goes over Creator candidates, selects what to included, but does not (can not?) link CreatorProperty instances found using this method; only ones that were already located are

Now: there are couple of ways things could be improved. For example, either

• Try to link not-explicitly-named properties from step (3), after the fact (also merging annotations)
• Move Creator discovery to an earlier stage (POJOPropertiesCollector); at least explicitly located ones

of these, first option seems more likely for 2.x; second better overall (and hence for 3.x).
But both are big enough changes that they probably should NOT be attempted for 2.12.x patch release; esp. since there are workarounds.

So marking this as 2.13, unlikely to be attempted for 2.12.x.