Mailing-List: contact ojb-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <001601c2c8b8$932d1c60$ad874fa5@EDHWSSZB03>
From: "Richard Beauchamp" <richard@rbeau.com>
To: "OJB Developers List" <ojb-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
References: 
 <FF657657D9572E4880D73B644ACE91D883AC58@plsrv07.corp.againtech.com>
Subject: Re: WithMultiArgsConstructor
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 15:37:07 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

OK. Thanks Matthew. I'll run the new implementation against the current test
cases and see how it goes...

----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Baird" <Matthew.Baird@motiva.com>
To: "OJB Developers List" <ojb-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 3:26 PM
Subject: RE: WithMultiArgsConstructor


> it's my opinion that any 'buildWithMultiArgsConstructor' is not safe if
you want to support multiple classes mapped to the same table with the
current implementation. Not that it can't be done, but it might require some
changes bigger than just 'buildWithMultiArgsConstructor'. Luckily there are
a ton of test cases around that functionality now.
>
> I am available to answer questions on that code if necessary.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Beauchamp [mailto:richard@rbeau.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 3:03 PM
> To: 'OJB Developers List'
> Subject: RE: WithMultiArgsConstructor
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> I know this is a reply to an old post, but I'm just now updating our
> infrastructure from OJB 0.9 to 0.9.8 and noticed that the new
> 'buildWithMultiArgsConstructor' method signature is modified (i.e.,
declares
> a Map rather than an Object[]) and is not used anymore.
>
> Having a safe 'buildWithMultiArgsConstructor' (as in OJB 0.9) is extremely
> important to our team because we declare some persistent object (po)
> properties as 'final'. If the only means to create a po was via a no-arg
> constructor + reflection (as in OJB 0.9.8) then we couldn't declare some
po
> properties as 'final' and our pos would therefore become less correct and
> less safe.
>
> I'll work on a safe 'buildWithMultiArgsConstructor' and post it to the OJB
> dev list.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>
> > From: Mahler Thomas thomas.mahler@itellium.com>
> > Subject: AW: WithMultiArgsConstructor
> > Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 17:17:25 +0200
> > Hi,
>
> > > -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----
> > > Von: Matthew Baird [mailto:Matthew.Baird@motiva.com]
> > > Gesendet: Montag, 8. Juli 2002 23:54
> > > An: OJB Developers List
> > > Betreff: RE: WithMultiArgsConstructor
> > >
> > >
> > > I think I took out the buildWithMultiArgsConstructor
> > > functionality as it is pretty dangerous. I left this function
> > > in case anyone complained.
> > >
> > > I will remove it if no one minds.
> >
> > Please not remove it!
> >
> > I think we should reimplement the buildWithMultiArgsConstructor in a
safe
> > way.
> > Using this constructor is much faster than setting the primitive type
> > attributes one by one.
> >
> > cheers,
> > Thomas
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ojb-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ojb-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>