You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to jdo-dev@db.apache.org by Andy Jefferson <an...@jpox.org> on 2007/07/27 13:25:23 UTC
Company model : concrete classes and use of "field-type"
Hi,
I just looked through the company model and noted that the concrete classes
now have some fields marked with "field-type" in the XML (e.g
Company.address). Why? The field has its own type so there is no need to
specify that. It is typically for use where a field is an interface and so to
define the implementation(s) that the field will accept. Is there a reason
for specifying it ?
--
Andy (Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)
Re: Company model : concrete classes and use of "field-type"
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Done.
Thanks,
Craig
P.S. You are welcome to commit these changes yourself...
On Jul 27, 2007, at 8:30 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:
> Hi Craig,
>
>> Looking briefly, it looks like the only cases are for the embedded
>> Address field. Is this what you are referring to?
>
> That's the one I spotted and didn't look further.
>
>
>
> PS. "api2" seems to be missing a couple of files being checked in
> for a
> working build
> test/java/javax/jdo/annotations/TestEmbeddedSet.java
> test/java/javax/jdo/annotations/TestEmbeddedMap.java
> - change the "embedded" to "embeddedMapping".
>
>
>
> --
> Andy (Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: Company model : concrete classes and use of "field-type"
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi,
On Jul 27, 2007, at 9:10 AM, Michael Bouschen wrote:
> Hi Craig,
>
> Michelle volunteered to take a look.
Thanks for that.
> I think setting the field-type is not necessary, because the
> declared Java type is Address, a PC class and not an interface. It
> is ok to specify the field-type, but it might be confusing since it
> is not necessary. So I propose to remove it.
I agree that field-type for Address fields is unnecessary and should
be removed.
Craig
>
> Regards Michael
>
>> To your field-type issue, I'll take a look at this later. Do you
>> think it's causing issues?
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> On Jul 27, 2007, at 8:30 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Craig,
>>>
>>>> Looking briefly, it looks like the only cases are for the embedded
>>>> Address field. Is this what you are referring to?
>>>
>>> That's the one I spotted and didn't look further.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> PS. "api2" seems to be missing a couple of files being checked in
>>> for a
>>> working build
>>> test/java/javax/jdo/annotations/TestEmbeddedSet.java
>>> test/java/javax/jdo/annotations/TestEmbeddedMap.java
>>> - change the "embedded" to "embeddedMapping".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Andy (Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)
>>
>> Craig Russell
>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/
>> jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>
>
>
> --
> Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH Tel.: +49/(0)30/235 520-33
> Buelowstr. 66 Fax.: +49/(0)30/217 520-12
> 10783 Berlin mailto:mbo.tech@spree.de
> Geschaeftsfuehrung: Anna-Kristin Proefrock
> Sitz Berlin, Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 564 52
>
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: Company model : concrete classes and use of "field-type"
Posted by Michael Bouschen <mb...@spree.de>.
Hi Craig,
Michelle volunteered to take a look. I think setting the field-type is
not necessary, because the declared Java type is Address, a PC class and
not an interface. It is ok to specify the field-type, but it might be
confusing since it is not necessary. So I propose to remove it.
Regards Michael
> To your field-type issue, I'll take a look at this later. Do you think
> it's causing issues?
>
> Craig
>
> On Jul 27, 2007, at 8:30 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:
>
>> Hi Craig,
>>
>>> Looking briefly, it looks like the only cases are for the embedded
>>> Address field. Is this what you are referring to?
>>
>> That's the one I spotted and didn't look further.
>>
>>
>>
>> PS. "api2" seems to be missing a couple of files being checked in for a
>> working build
>> test/java/javax/jdo/annotations/TestEmbeddedSet.java
>> test/java/javax/jdo/annotations/TestEmbeddedMap.java
>> - change the "embedded" to "embeddedMapping".
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andy (Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)
>
> Craig Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
--
Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH Tel.: +49/(0)30/235 520-33
Buelowstr. 66 Fax.: +49/(0)30/217 520-12
10783 Berlin mailto:mbo.tech@spree.de
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Anna-Kristin Proefrock
Sitz Berlin, Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 564 52
Re: Company model : concrete classes and use of "field-type"
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
To your field-type issue, I'll take a look at this later. Do you
think it's causing issues?
Craig
On Jul 27, 2007, at 8:30 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:
> Hi Craig,
>
>> Looking briefly, it looks like the only cases are for the embedded
>> Address field. Is this what you are referring to?
>
> That's the one I spotted and didn't look further.
>
>
>
> PS. "api2" seems to be missing a couple of files being checked in
> for a
> working build
> test/java/javax/jdo/annotations/TestEmbeddedSet.java
> test/java/javax/jdo/annotations/TestEmbeddedMap.java
> - change the "embedded" to "embeddedMapping".
>
>
>
> --
> Andy (Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: Company model : concrete classes and use of "field-type"
Posted by Andy Jefferson <an...@jpox.org>.
Hi Craig,
> Looking briefly, it looks like the only cases are for the embedded
> Address field. Is this what you are referring to?
That's the one I spotted and didn't look further.
PS. "api2" seems to be missing a couple of files being checked in for a
working build
test/java/javax/jdo/annotations/TestEmbeddedSet.java
test/java/javax/jdo/annotations/TestEmbeddedMap.java
- change the "embedded" to "embeddedMapping".
--
Andy (Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)
Re: Company model : concrete classes and use of "field-type"
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Andy,
On Jul 27, 2007, at 4:25 AM, Andy Jefferson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just looked through the company model and noted that the concrete
> classes
> now have some fields marked with "field-type" in the XML (e.g
> Company.address). Why? The field has its own type so there is no
> need to
> specify that. It is typically for use where a field is an interface
> and so to
> define the implementation(s) that the field will accept. Is there a
> reason
> for specifying it ?
Not that I know of.
Looking briefly, it looks like the only cases are for the embedded
Address field. Is this what you are referring to?
Craig
>
>
> --
> Andy (Java Persistent Objects - http://www.jpox.org)
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!