+1 to making the constructor protected.
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 2:10 AM, Andrus Adamchik <and...@objectstyle.org> wrote: > Usually we have private constructors for statics only classes (as is the case > here). It sort of indicates it to the end users that the class is not > supposed to be instantiated. While technically you won't get true > polymorphism by inheriting from statics-only class in Java, it may still be > beneficial to add more static methods to a subclass I guess. So how about we > change that to protected? (in 3.2?) > > Andrus > > > On Sep 8, 2014, at 11:18 PM, Michael Gentry <mgen...@masslight.net> wrote: >> FWIW, I tried to extend the Cayenne class (we had a discussion about that >> ages ago) and even though it is no longer final, it cannot be extended >> because of the private constructor. Should we remove the private >> constructor to allow "subclassing" like Apache Commons allows? >> >> Thanks, >> >> mrg >> >> >> On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 3:03 AM, Andrus Adamchik <and...@objectstyle.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Done. >>> >>> Once I was a big fan of terse non-redundant APIs. Not anymore :) Now that >>> we are moving in the direction of richer user-facing APIs, builders, etc, >>> so this only makes sense to add this method back. >>> >>> Andrus >>> >>> >>> On Sep 5, 2014, at 4:16 PM, Michael Gentry <mgen...@masslight.net> wrote: >>>> I seem to recall a discussion on that particular method years ago, but >>>> don't remember the details (I'd have to go back and find it). >>>> >>>> I'm fine with having deleteObject() just turn around and call >>>> deleteObjects() because it makes the calling code read better, even at >>> the >>>> "expense" of cluttering up the API (although this isn't much, really). >>>> >>>> mrg >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 7:07 AM, Andrus Adamchik <and...@objectstyle.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> One possible last minute change is un-deprecating >>>>> ObjectContext.deleteObject(..). It can easily coexist with >>> 'deleteObjects', >>>>> and getting rid of it was not the best idea on my part. >>>>> >>>>> Andrus >>>>> >>>>> On Aug 30, 2014, at 9:28 PM, Andrus Adamchik <and...@objectstyle.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In preparation to the 3.1-final vote, I ran the same set of tests as we >>>>> did for RC1. All tests are on Java 1.6 unless specified otherwise. You >>> can >>>>> compare it with the previous results at >>>>> http://markmail.org/message/slaj64iunxbeg4cs . Essentially everything >>> is >>>>> the same, so the latest 3.1 changes didn't break anything obvious. >>> There's >>>>> one less test failure on Oracle, which is related to my improved Oracle >>>>> setup, rather than anything in Cayenne. Feel free to replicate the >>> results >>>>> in your own environment. >>>>>> >>>>>> rat: PASSED >>>>>> hsql: PASSED >>>>>> h2: PASSED >>>>>> derby: PASSED >>>>>> derby/Java7: PASSED >>>>>> mysql 5.0: [1] PASSED >>>>>> mysql 5.6: [2] PASSED >>>>>> sqlserver [3] PASSED >>>>>> postgresql: Failures: 1 >>>>> testBLOB(org.apache.cayenne.access.ReturnTypesMappingTest) >>>>>> oracle 11: Failed tests: >>>>>> testBIGINT(org.apache.cayenne.access.ReturnTypesMappingTest) >>>>>> testBIT(org.apache.cayenne.access.ReturnTypesMappingTest) >>>>>> testBOOLEAN(org.apache.cayenne.access.ReturnTypesMappingTest) >>>>>> testDOUBLE(org.apache.cayenne.access.ReturnTypesMappingTest) >>>>>> testFLOAT(org.apache.cayenne.access.ReturnTypesMappingTest) >>>>>> testREAL(org.apache.cayenne.access.ReturnTypesMappingTest) >>>>>> testSMALLINT(org.apache.cayenne.access.ReturnTypesMappingTest) >>>>>> testTINYINT(org.apache.cayenne.access.ReturnTypesMappingTest) >>>>>> >>>>>> Tests run: 2150, Failures: 8, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0 >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] MySQL 5.0 config: [mysqld] max_allowed_packet=16M >>>>>> >>>>>> [2] MySQL 5.6 config: [mysqld] max_allowed_packet=16M >>>>> lower_case_table_names = 1 >>>>>> >>>>>> [3] SQL Server 2005 Expression config: collation - >>>>> SQL_Latin1_general_CP1_CS_AS >>>>>> >>>>>> Andrus >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >
