Thanks for the pull request. This pull request looks good to me. Can you use 2-space-indent instead of 4-space-indent to align with our current coding style? Thanks.

Thanks for the pull request. This pull request looks good to me. Can you use 2-space-indent instead of 4-space-indent to align with our current coding style? Thanks.

changed.

Hi recently I created pr for new feature that I think will be useful (I hope because I use it). But after solve discussion but I didn't see any respond, maybe now it will be useful ?Thats why I think this small feature will be useful ?

It's a good idea to have a method map in the AbstractConverter, but I think it will be better to remove the local variable MappingEngineImpl mappingEngine.

Any idea if we can remove the local variable? Thanks!

thanks I'm do link static.

Hi @Merdoc97 ,

Sorry for the lately reply :(
And thanks for your contribution, I'm really appreciate it.

I still think it's not a good idea to introduce mappingEngine as a local variable of AbstractConverter.
For those cases which needs the mappingEngine to convert child inside the implementation of Converter, I suggest to implement Converter directly instead of extend AbstractConverter.

class ParentConverter implements Converter<ParentEntity, ParentDTO> {

    @Override
    protected ParentDTO convert(MappingContext<ParentEntity, ParentDTO> context) {
      ParentEntity source = context.getSource();
      ParentDTO dto = new ParentDTO();
      dto.setSecondName(source.getSecondName());
      dto.setName(source.getName());
      dto.setChild(context.getMappingEngine().map(source.getChild(), ChildDTO.class));
      return dto;
    }
  }

What do you think?