>
> I don't see it as part of the generator. The generator
> takes a model file
> and creates java source from a template. If the end user
> doesn't like the
> default templates used to generate that source, they can
> easily change them.
> The default templates cayenne supplies should also work with 1.5.
>
I disagree with your argument. The generator takes all sorts of parameters
that it uses to generate those templates. This would not be unprecedented -
in fact it would fit in.. Template customization is really for users who
need to tailor the resultant superclasses to go beyond what Cayenne
provides. Having a generator spit out classes that work with your JDK, on
the other hand, seems like something that Cayenne should provide
> However, I think it'd be great if we also provided (either
> via the Wiki or as an alternate template set in cvs) files
> that can take advantage of 1.5.
>
> However, choosing those files should be done by supplying a different
> template file rather than specifying a generator property.
> The generator
> itself doesn't care what the final files look like. (Or to
> put it another
> way, the API for specifying an alternate template should
> remain specifying another template rather than adding a
> special "create java 1.5 templates"
> property which would end up being implemented by specifying
> an alternate template underneath anyway.)
>
This may be the cause of our disagreement. There's no reason to have 2
templates - they would be identical in every way but 2 List references. This
seems like a real maintenance burden (though I submit the templates seem to
have changed little over the last several months). Seems silly to require an
additional template for something that really is a function of the language.
To clarify, a consolidated template is attached. The jdk15 boolean param
would drive whether or not generics were used.
Cris
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sat Mar 05 2005 - 17:10:49 EST