checkValid is broken about config

[havocp]

My guess is that you need memberONE/memberTWO and reference to be at the same "depth".
i.e. both should have the member-config{} outer object or not.

yes, you are right;
https://github.com/barchart/barchart-inst/blob/master/barchart-inst-store-sql/src/test/java/typesafe/TestCheckValid1.java

but it seems highly counter-intuitive if you think of

final Config memberONE = reference.getConfig("member-config");

as extracted bean properties; what is the way to avoid redundant root object
https://github.com/barchart/barchart-inst/blob/master/barchart-inst-store-sql/src/test/java/typesafe/TestCheckValid1.java

?

I guess one answer would be:
"the bean should not check its own validity; checkValid should be done by whoever instantiates the bean"
but it does not sound right to me, when there are many places doing instantiation

current checkValid approach also seems to force use of redundant root to validate list members?

[havocp]

The normal case is assumed to be config.checkValid(reference, "something") where config and reference were from say application.conf and reference.conf, and therefore would have the full paths to everything including "something". The sample lib in examples/ I think shows how the API is expected to be used.

In the latest version you can always use atPath("member-config") or atKey("member-config") to quickly wrap that full path around your config.

You can also solve this by just being consistent about doing the getConfig on both sides of the operation; config.getConfig("member-config").checkValid(reference.getConfig("member-config"))

ok, got it;

1. atPath("member-config") seems to be the best way to go

2. config.getConfig("member-config").checkValid(reference.getConfig("member-config")) is begging
   for an alternative form of checkValid