[PR #1275] [WIP] Nullable embedded objects. #9331

New Issue

admin · 2026-01-22T16:03:59+01:00

admin commented

2026-01-22 16:03:59 +01:00

Original Pull Request: https://github.com/doctrine/orm/pull/1275

State: closed
Merged: No

The idea was to have a simple (and clean) way to override the nullable property of embedded objects, so I've
added the nullable attribute on the @Embedded annotation and it have 3 possible values:

NULL: The nullable option that was defined on the attributes of the embeddable class won't be overriden;
TRUE: All attributes of the embeddable class will be marked as nullable and the embeddable instance only would be created when data is not NULL;
~~FALSE: All attributes of the embeddable class will be marked as non-nullable.~~

There's a lot of things to be improved (mostly on UnitOfWork), but it's fully working with basic tests as you can see on ValueObjectsTest::testCRUDOfNullableEmbedded() case.

I would appreciate a lot your opinions!

**Original Pull Request:** https://github.com/doctrine/orm/pull/1275 **State:** closed **Merged:** No --- The idea was to have a simple (and clean) way to override the nullable property of embedded objects, so I've added the `nullable` attribute on the `@Embedded` annotation and it have 3 possible values: - NULL: The nullable option that was defined on the attributes of the embeddable class won't be overriden; - TRUE: All attributes of the embeddable class will be marked as nullable and the embeddable instance only would be created when data is not NULL; - ~~FALSE: All attributes of the embeddable class will be marked as non-nullable.~~ There's a lot of things to be improved (mostly on UnitOfWork), but it's fully working with basic tests as you can see on ValueObjectsTest::testCRUDOfNullableEmbedded() case. I would appreciate a lot your opinions!

admin added the pull-request label 2026-01-22 16:03:59 +01:00

admin closed this issue

2026-01-22 16:04:00 +01:00

admin referenced this issue

2026-01-22 16:11:04 +01:00

[PR #9331] Merge 2.10.x into 2.11.x #11537

Sign in to join this conversation.