[hibernate-dev] Programmatic Mapping patch

[Amin Mohammed-Coleman]

Hi Emmanuel,
Thanks.  I'm working on the docs at the moment.


I've added some of my comments.

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Emmanuel Bernard <emmanuel at hibernate.org>wrote:

>
> On 20 nov. 09, at 15:20, Emmanuel Bernard wrote:
>
> Hi Amin,
> I've committed your patch, thanks!
> There is still some work and questions remaining but that's a big coverage
> improvement. Now on to the doc to get the release out :)
>
> Here is my raw feedback
>
> 1.
> Interface vs class?
> Should we start using interfaces instead of classes, at least for
> SearchMapping. That way we could hide the getEntityDescriptor() method to
> the users.
> I think we need to start using superclasses or super interfaces to enforce
> the repeated contracts down to the tree of navigation?
>
>
makes sense.

>
> 2.
> Should the methods be on IndexedMapping not EntityMapping?
>  - fullTextFilterDef
>  - analyzerDiscriminator
>  - similarity
> Question to Hardy and Sanne, do these concepts make sense on a non @indexed
> element? I can't remember how the parser behaves.
>
>


> I think these methods should be onn IndexedMapping rather than
> EntityMapping
>  - boost
>  - providedId
>
>

> The problem with this approach is that we would need to differentiate
> PropertyMapping and IndexedPropertyMapping. I am not sure this additional
> complexity is worth the extra help to the developer.
>
> Not sure about indexPropertyMapping,  I like the PropertyMapping as it is
clear and then I can add other stuff to it. (Long day athe moment so
apologies if i don't make sense.


> 3.
> property(String name, ElementType type) should it be replaced with specific
> methods like?
> .field() => conflict with lucene field
> .getter()
>
> Again from a user point of view field() makes sense because it is the field
that I want represented in lucene.


> 4.
> Is date bridge exclusive to calendar bridge? I think the contract expresses
> that today.
>
>
> 5.
> ContainedInMapping does not contain the necessary upper methods.
>
> I can add these.


> 6.
> I've updated the original ProvidedIdTest, Can you push the same changes to
> the programmatic version of the test.
>
>
>
I'll update as well.



Thanks. I'll try to get the documentation done as soon as possible.