db-jdo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Jefferson <a...@jpox.org>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (JDO-510) Remove @Field and @Property and replace them with @Persistent
Date Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:32:41 GMT
Hi Craig,

> The issue here is if both type and types are specified, which one
> wins? Since types can be both single or multiple types, I think
> there's less opportunity for error if there is only one element, and
> types does it. And it is evocative of the notion that even though you
> specified a type on your field/property (or not, for unadorned
> collection/map types), there are more constraints on the actual types
> that you can put into it.

No problem with just having the "types" element for me ... that's what I had 
originally :-). What the user types
@Element(types=MyElement.class)
compared to the single form
@Element(type=MyElement.class)
is so similar I didn't see the point of the single form variant and, of 
course, it also allows multiple values for implementations that support it. 
Just want to avoid that option being included and then removed, and then back 
in again.

> Meantime, I'll check in the change from boundTypes to types to keep things 
> moving. 

Thx. 
JPOX CVS now builds with latest Apache JDO jdo2-api.jar 
(@Persistent,@Element,@Key,@Value "boundTypes" -> "types", and also 
@Element,@Key,@Value "embedded" change). I've started the "nightly" build 
running so there are jars if anyone wants to run with it.


-- 
Andy  (Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)

Mime
View raw message