db-torque-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Fischer <fisc...@seitenbau.net>
Subject Re: Attibute modifications in schema
Date Thu, 30 Sep 2010 03:24:51 GMT
> > table.abstract
> > I'm of the opinion that the abstract attribute works but Thomas V is of
> > another opinion. But, thinking about it, we can make it work once the
Peer
> > class is not static any more. So the question is do we think it's
useful
> > and should be kept or should we drop it (This quesion mainly goes to
Thomas
> > V as Greg has already answered it in favour of dropping)
>
> I tried to make myself clear in another mail. That said, I have never
> used that attribute and probably won't miss it.

Ok, but now as I have understood that it is working we can also keep it. No
big pain involved.

> The idea behind the attribute is however interesting. There are quite a
> few other frameworks that generate bean-like classes which could be used
> as Torque objects right away (JAXB comes to mind).

Just to make sure I understand what you are saying this time. You would
- mark the Torque object as abstract
- inherit the JAXB object from the Torque object (thisi s the difficult
part)
- and override the getOMClass method in the Peer class

I do not think this is working because the usual foreign generation
frameworks do not allow for the generated classes to inherit from other
classes. So it must either be the other way round (Torque objects
inheriting from JAXB object), which is currently not possible because
Torque objects need to extend BaseObject (however, in my opinion this could
be changed easily), or to use composition instead of inheritance (create a
new object keeping instances of the two, and delegate calls through), which
sounds difficult as the creation of these composited objects is difficult
to get back in the frameworks.

> I remember having a
> hard time when I tried to adjust the Fulcrum security interfaces to
> Torque objects. Maybe we find a more elegant solution when we rework the
> runtime.

I would be in favour of dropping the need for "extends BaseObject".

    Thomas


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


Mime
View raw message