ibatis-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Direct-to-Field mappings now implemented.
Date Sat, 10 Feb 2007 05:02:22 GMT
I searched the mail archives, but I am not privy to what Jeff originally 
described. Is it anything similar to what I've been talking about? 
Please send me a link or email :-)


Clinton Begin wrote:
> Okay guys.  I'm convinced.  Let's give this thread 24 hours for anyone
> else who wants to chime in.  If nobody speaks up, we'll implement it
> the way Jeff described it originally.
> I think it will be cool regardless.   I'm actually feeling pretty dumb
> for not implementing this 3 years ago...it was way too easy to have
> not done it long ago.  it was a couple of extra methods and a few line
> changes in about 5 classes...  :-/
> Cheers,
> Clinton
> On 2/9/07, Poitras Christian <Christian.Poitras@ircm.qc.ca> wrote:
>> I guess you have a point.
>> Probably 90% of developpers won't want to know how the real path used...
>> Even if knowing it is interesting, it might disapoint people to force 
>> them
>> to know it in advance.
>> In other cases, getters may include code that will be skipped using 
>> direct
>> field access.
>> Now the point to this email is that iBATIS didn't force people to have an
>> idea of the implementation before writting xml files. Changing this habit
>> may reduce the interest of iBATIS as a simple tool for O/R mapping.
>> Personally, I am afraid of the reactions some people will have when 
>> they'll
>> begin mixing beans, pojos and maps (all 3 for crazy people only!, but 
>> most
>> pojos/maps users).
>> Another problem will arise with resultMaps that will need this 
>> notation at
>> the same time (to know if we call a setter or a use the field).
>> I personally think it is to late to force people to change their iBATIS
>> habit. But make sure that they'll know what the framework will do. For
>> instance calling the getter if present, if not accessing the field 
>> directly.
>> Maybe the notation can be optionnal and will force iBATIS to try 
>> accessing
>> the field first, then the getter if field is not present. Think this 
>> would
>> do?
>> Christian
>>  ________________________________
>>  From: paulus.benedictus@gmail.com 
>> [mailto:paulus.benedictus@gmail.com] On
>> Behalf Of Paul Benedict
>> Sent: Friday, 09 February 2007 15:17
>> To: dev@ibatis.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Direct-to-Field mappings now implemented.
>> Poitras and Clinton,
>> I agree. The refactoring argument is pretty strong. Property notation is
>> script-like because the actual means to get to the value (method vs.
>> direct-field access) is totally secondary to the intention. The developer
>> just needs to express the path, and the framework should be intelligent
>> enough to get there. But we can't assume the developer always wants
>> direct-field access, which is why the option must be turned on.
>> PS: -1 on the brackets.
>> Paul

View raw message