db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Knut Anders Hatlen (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Closed] (DERBY-5883) Simplify JSR-169 implementation class tree
Date Mon, 13 Aug 2012 12:56:38 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5883?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel

Knut Anders Hatlen closed DERBY-5883.

          Resolution: Fixed
       Fix Version/s:
    Issue & fix info:   (was: Patch Available)

Committed revision 1372404.
> Simplify JSR-169 implementation class tree
> ------------------------------------------
>                 Key: DERBY-5883
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5883
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: JDBC
>    Affects Versions:
>            Reporter: Knut Anders Hatlen
>            Assignee: Knut Anders Hatlen
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For:
>         Attachments: d5883-1a.diff
> The JSR-169 interface is a subset of JDBC 3.0, but still the JDBC 3.0 implementation
classes do not extend the JSR-169 implementation classes. Instead, the JSR-169 and JDBC 3.0
implementation classes extend a common base class. The reason for this structure, is that
the JSR-169 compile targets used to be optional, so the JDBC 3.0 classes could not depend
on them.
> For example, the class javadoc comment for EmbedResultSet169 says:
>  * ResultSet implementation for JSR169.
>  * Adds no functionality to its (abstract) parent class.
>  * If Derby could be compiled against JSR169 that the parent
>  * class could be the concrete class for the environment.
>  * Just like for the JDBC 2.0 specific classes.
>  * Until that is possible (ie. easily downloadable J2ME/CDC/Foundation/JSR169
>  * jar files, this class is required and is only compiled by an optional target.
> Since the JSR-169 code is no longer optional, we should do as the comment suggests, and
use the base class directly instead. This would allow us to simplify the class tree.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


View raw message