Re: [hibernate-dev] Why must abstract be specified in mappings?
This is a user related question that should go on our forums https://forums.hibernate.org
<https://forums.hibernate.org/>
But to answer you, you sometimes want to have a physical table for that abstract class. So
Hibernate ORM’s “abstract” really means map it to a table or not. Java’s abstract has a
different meaning, it means must be subclassed or not. Mapping both together does not
really work.
Could you propose a small pull request that clarifies this in the documentation ?
Emmanuel
On 24 Nov 2014, at 11:58, Oskar Berggren
<oskar.berggren(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
The Hibernate documentation (section 10.1.5. Table per concrete class
http://docs.jboss.org/hibernate/orm/4.3/manual/en-US/html/ch10.html#inher...
) says:
> If your superclass is abstract, map it with abstract="true". If it is not
abstract,
> an additional table (it defaults to PAYMENT in the example above), is
needed
> to hold instances of the superclass.
Why is this keyword needed? Couldn't abstract classes be detected
automatically using reflection?
/Oskar
_______________________________________________
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev