Mailing-List: contact torque-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Torque Developers List" <torque-dev@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: AW: Torque with Java5 features
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 10:49:45 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <F1EF69E69C1EED4FA3BB295B07664EEE15DD7D@srv-master.cadooz-ag.intern>
Thread-Topic: Torque with Java5 features
thread-index: AcXxqTvc9Vnw1w1fSwa3TVos1B/CmwAA6nvQBX2qWxAAAKAn4A==
From: "Thoralf Rickert" <thoralf.rickert@cadooz.de>
To: "Apache Torque Developers List" <torque-dev@db.apache.org>

Okay, now I've 'cheated' the OM templates in Torque 3.2 to enable Java5 =
features. I've tested the Peer and Object generation. Everything else is =
untested (Managers and Beans) but implemented as good as possible. The =
templates are currently Java5 enabled. You have to UNSET the =
"enableJava5Features" variable. This makes it possible to define a =
configuration key and make the variable visible, when the configuration =
file this says. So I didn't change the Torque Source code (that's maybe =
you task).

http://thoralf.log-out.net/tmp/java5enabled-templates.zip

Merry Christmas
Thoralf


> > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Thoralf Rickert
> > Gesendet: Freitag, 25. November 2005 12:07
> > An: 'Apache Torque Developers List'
> > Betreff: AW: Torque with Java5 features
> >=20
> >=20
> > > Just to make sure that I understood you correctly: You=20
> were able to=20
> > > convert the templates without chamnging the Runtime jar, and it=20
> > > worked ?
> >=20
> > Jo.
> >=20
> > > - Testing would be more complicated. At the moment, it is=20
> already a=20
> > > nuisance to change the databases by hand, and to change=20
> the idtable=20
> > > property by hand. To not spend my life testing, I do=20
> admit I usually=20
> > > do not switch other parameters. So this would add another=20
> parameter=20
> > > to be
> > > switched; this gets to a point where something atomatic would
> > > have to be written.
> >=20
> > Just thinking: What about a script that compiles and verifies
> > each possible configuration?
> >=20
> > > - We already have too many generator parameters. We need to think=20
> > > about that problem. But I would guess in this case, a=20
> configuration=20
> > > parameter would be the only sensible way (maintaining two sets of=20
> > > templates, with managers and withou them, is a nuisance=20
> already, I=20
> > > would not want another
> > > split)
> > > - In my eyes, it is certainly a nice feature, but it is not
> > > the first in my personal list of priorities for after 3.2. I=20
> > > would support it if it would be done, but I would not do=20
> it myself.
> >=20
> > Because I would chance our torque environment to 3.2 after
> > you've released it, I would also change the templates again=20
> > to use them with Java5. So it would be a clear start for me=20
> > and no problem to submit it back to you.
> >=20
> > But I don't have such a complex test environment. We use only
> > the Object and Peer Templates. So I don't know, if it is=20
> > possible to change the Manager to Java5. Do you've a=20
> > documentation, which discribes, what you're testing?
> >=20
> > bye
> > Thoralf
> >=20
>=20


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org