+1.
Although having truly generified queries would be useful in many
situations, I think it's too late in the dev. cycle for 3.0 to add
this now.
Robert
On Oct 16, 2009, at 10/1612:55 PM , Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
> On Oct 16, 2009, at 8:04 PM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:
>
>> Actually, as already mentioned, we need to do something around
>> CAY-942
>> (query generics). This is very critical and desired API change
>
> Not sure if we have another more precise Jira (since generics in
> relationships mentioned in this Jira have already been added).
>
> Anyways, if we are talking about query generics, I did some research
> and prototyping of that in the past. My conclusion is that to do it
> right it has to be a rather dramatic change in Cayenne, affecting
> not simply the code, but a number design concepts. Essentially we
> have too many variables to squeeze into a rather rigid Java generics
> engine. To start, here is possible query result types:
>
> ? extends Persistent
> ? extends Object (unfinished POJO implementation)
> CayenneDataObject (as in "generic persistence" [1])
> DataRow
> scalar
> Object[] (a mix of scalars and any of the above)
>
> I don't see how we can easily parameterize that in a meaningful way.
>
> So my vote is to postpone this till 3.1 and make it a 3.1 priority
> to create an appropriate generics based query design, and maybe
> reduce the number of options. I don't think significantly delaying
> and radically changing 3.0 (that has been de-facto stable for some
> time) is a good idea.
>
> Andrus
>
> [1] http://cayenne.apache.org/doc/generic-persistent-class.html
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sat Oct 17 2009 - 11:30:23 EDT