Brennan';
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data
Object vs Value Object
DO is the same concept as VO.
VO will replace DO in the future.
More powerful.
-Original Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of JD Brennan
Sent: mercredi 10
,
that is)?
Steve
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Hicks, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Marcus Brito [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lista XDoclet-User
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 2:01 PM
Subject: Re: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object
Just a suggestion
, 2002 11:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object
I think I have discovered another deficiency in Value Objects.
If I have two value objects for an entity (NormalValue and LightValue) and I
make a call to the bean's setNormalValue( ), should the changes
PROTECTED]Asunto: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data
Object vs Value Object
Imho we should use what
Floyd uses in his EJB Patterns book.
Ara.
-Original
Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of JD BrennanSent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11
AbrahamianSent: vendredi 12 avril 2002 10:39To: 'JD
Brennan'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE:
[Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object
Imho we should use what
Floyd uses in his EJB Patterns book.
Ara.
-Original
Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
. But whatexactly are you working on?
Thanks,
Steve
- Original Message -
From:
Hicks,
James
To: JD Brennan ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 8:26
PM
Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data Object
vs Value Object
Ive heard
the concept called all3: Value
: 936.462.4655
Fax: 936.462.4655
Pager: 936.568.4296
I-Pager: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Marcus Brito [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 9:54 PM
To: Lista XDoclet-User
Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object
Em Qua, 2002-04-10 às 21:26
Fax:
936.462.4655 Pager:
936.568.4296 I-Pager:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-From: Steve Knight
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 7:34
AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re:
[Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object
James,
What sort of patches
]
Date: Thursday, April 11, 2002 5:34 pm
Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object
I was unaware that anyone was fixing it to work with CMP2. The
last i heard
was that no special work was going to be performed to make it work
withcmp2. I have a CVS snapshot from about 2 weeks
or the other, I'm
just trying
to stick my finger in the air to see which way
the wind
is blowing.
;-)
Tx!
JD
-Original Message-From: Vincent Harcq
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002
10:07 PMTo: 'JD Brennan';
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data
Object vs
';
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data
Object vs Value Object
DO
is the same concept as VO.
VO
will replace DO in the future. More powerful.
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of JD
Title: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Data Object vs Value Object
Interesting that you used the words data and moving to
describe what Value Object does. That would indicate to me
that Data Moving Object or Data Transfer Object (transfer
being a synonym for moving) might be a better name.
The term
Em Qua, 2002-04-10 às 21:26, Hicks, James escreveu:
If you are working with CMP 2.0, valueobject subtask in XDoclet will not
work. I am currently working on a patch for this, which hopefully, if
everything goes right, will be finished this coming weekend.
Hey, it DOES work. I've put some
Title: Message
DO is
the same concept as VO.
VO
will replace DO in the future. More powerful.
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of JD
BrennanSent: mercredi 10 avril 2002 2:39To:
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: [Xdoclet-user]
14 matches
Mail list logo
