[hibernate-dev] Programmatic Mapping patch
Amin Mohammed-Coleman
aminmc at gmail.com
Wed Nov 25 10:29:44 EST 2009
Hi All,
Would it be possible get feedback with regards to points 2, 3 and 4. I can
create patch to address those issues.
Cheers
Amin
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Emmanuel Bernard <ebernard at redhat.com>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?
>
> 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.
>
> 3.
> property(String name, ElementType type) should it be replaced with specific
> methods like?
> .field() => conflict with lucene field
> .getter()
>
> 4.
> Is date bridge exclusive to calendar bridge? I think the contract expresses
> that today.
>
> 5.
> ContainedInMapping does not contain the necessary upper methods.
>
> 6.
> I've updated the original ProvidedIdTest, Can you push the same changes to
> the programmatic version of the test.
>
More information about the hibernate-dev
mailing list