db-torque-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Greg Monroe" <Greg.Mon...@DukeCE.com>
Subject Primitives or not (Was: Torque 4.0 plan)
Date Fri, 01 Dec 2006 16:05:10 GMT
I guess the real question is:

What do we mean by "Throw away primitives"?

There are three main area I think we are talking about:

The record objects, the criteria objects, and overall
runablity / compilability.

On the record side of things, I can't see that it's 
a big problem to keep supporting the primitive XML 
option.  Let the application designer decided whether
to use primitive or objects via this.  It's only a 
VERY small set of template code that's required to
create primitive getter/setters.  Everything internally
can be object or not.

The criteria object is a slightly different problem.
On one hand, I can see that going to object only would
simplify the multitude of add methods.  But it would
cause a lot of code to be re-written.

It may be time to dust off my VERY rough pass at 
creating a criteria API that Thomas T and I kicked
around a LONG time ago.  This might be useful to have
a "deprecated but works like the original" criteria and
a "new improved object only" criteria.  Then let the 
developer choose (with an emphasis on the DEPRECATED

As to the compilablity / runablity issues...
Personally, I'd like Torque generated code to be 
compilable/runnable under 1.4.  There are still a lot
of folks "stuck" at this level for various reasons. 
With Java going GPL, I suspect this number will be
dropping.. but probably not too fast.

But the hard limit is that it definitely needs to be 
RUNNABLE under 1.4.  I.e., you need 1.5 to create the 
OM layer but not run it.  But as people have pointed 
out, there is a whole bunch of 'gotchas' to look out 
for with this scenario. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henning P. Schmiedehausen [mailto:hps@intermeta.de] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 6:21 PM
> To: torque-dev@db.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Torque 4.0 plan
> Thomas Vandahl <thomas.vandahl@tewisoft.de> writes:
> >Greg Monroe wrote:
> >> Additionally, the generated record objects could make use
> >> of this new base class to support things like isNull() on
> >> primitives.  We could also use this to track modified and
> >> unmodified column values, which would be very useful (e.g.
> >> updating tables without primary keys). 
> >I'd throw primitives away completely. There is no advantage 
> in keeping 
> >them. Especially with JDK 1.5.
> You lose all the J2EE 1.4 people. J2EE will be (in the real world) on
> JDK 1.4 for a long time.
> There are tools like Retroweaver but throwing primitive support out is
> IMHO too early. Hibernate did and people still complain about it.
> 	Best regards
> 		Henning
> -- 
> Henning P. Schmiedehausen  -- hps@intermeta.de | J2EE, Linux,
> 91054 Buckenhof, Germany   -- +49 9131 506540 | Apache person
> Open Source Consulting, Development, Design | Velocity - Turbine guy
>           "Save the cheerleader. Save the world."
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org

Duke CE Privacy Statement
Please be advised that this e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential communication
or may otherwise be privileged or confidential and are intended solely for the individual
or entity to whom they are addressed.  If you are not the intended recipient you may not rely
on the contents of this email or any attachments, and we ask that you  please not read, copy
or retransmit this communication, but reply to the sender and destroy the email, its contents,
and all copies thereof immediately.  Any unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying
of this communication is strictly prohibited.

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

View raw message