Heh, you almost sold me on that ;-) An integrated solution is
definitely more...umm...integrated. Point taken. Even automatic
generation of db columns will be helpful during early stages of
design and prototyping, i.e. when you only have a single db instance
and no data to loose.
Of course I would like to skip the XML learning part. I wish I never
had to "learn" Tapestry XML formats. Spindle is great for keeping
things together in the project, but I'd really appreciate having a
higher-level abstraction than an XML file. Whatever.. different
people have different tastes. Raw XML editing should be an option.
So now my question is where this discussion is going? Are you
volunteering to start an Eclipse plugin project by any chance?
Andrus
On Aug 24, 2005, at 9:41 PM, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> What are interesting differences between these approaches?
>
> Some attempts at answering this question below:
>
> - Turnaround time. Example of how I imagine adding a field to a record
> to a database:
> 1. From Java code on foo.setBar(), press alt-Fx to jump into
> Cayenne XML file at the spot for the Foo class.
> 2. Right click menu
> 3. Add field
> 4. Wizard to choose type, name, and whether to create field
> in database
>
> - Quick fixes. Simply type "foo.setBar()" and the quickfix will launch
> you directly into the wizard to do the above.
>
> - Improved workflow. Compare the above to launching the Cayenne
> modeler
> and then navigating to the right spot, updating classes, database,
> return to Eclipse, refresh, rebuild, etc.
>
> - Interactive learning about the Cayenne XML format much as in Spindle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Aug 24 2005 - 14:38:31 EDT