Filip Hrisafov

@dugq this is a bit counterintuitive, but the unexpected call is done as a feature (i.e. the condition supports passing source parameters into it). Which means ```java if ( PresenceCheckUtils.isNotEmpty(...

@thunderhook I'm not following the solution you've proposed. When using update mappings the condition should not be used as we always check for null on the source before applying the...

>We don't support `@TargetProperty` yet? I can't find the issue that mentions it. No we don't and I don't really see that we should. It would complicate quite some things...

@jesusherencia can you please create a github repository with the code. Downloading files like that does not look safe to me (that's why I also deleted the comment)

I appologise @jesusherencia. I didn't see properly. Looking at the issue again it does not look like we need code to reproduce it. What I find strange is why would...

>Actual implementation has other method parameters (including List). >When I remove the Map parameter everything works fine. OK, we will check what is happening, but I think that the example...

Thanks @zyberzebra. The error you are getting is OKish. What I am confused is how can @jesusherencia get the error when the target property is explicitly ignored. So if you...

OK I see what the issue is. Since 1.5 we started supported mapping `Map` as a bean mapping. This means that for something like: ```java @Mapping(target = "arg1", ignore =...

Thanks for the PR @Srimathi-S. I wasn't expecting any changes in the public API, I was expecting only changes in the `ImmutablesBuilderProvider`. Perhaps the first step need to be improved...

In theory what you can try is to add ```java BuilderInfo findBuilderInfo( TypeMirror type, Set processedTypeElementSet ) ``` to the `DefaultBuilderProvider` and from the existing method call the new method....