I still prefer things to be spelled out. My personal philosophy is you are
writing code to be read, not writing code to be written. To me, it helps
when maintaining code or picking up someone else's code down the line.
mrg
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Andrus Adamchik <and...@objectstyle.org>
wrote:
> so, case sensitivity naming has its own inconsistencies already:
>
> ExpressionFactory.likeIgnoreCase(..)
> Property.likeInsensitive(..) // this is 4.0 API, we can change it
>
> I wonder if we should use the third shorter form going forward:
>
> likeI(..) # "I" is alluding to regex "i" flag.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Andrus
>
>
>
> > On Nov 21, 2014, at 6:08 PM, Mike Kienenberger <mkien...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Not only readability, but also picking the right options.
> >
> > For me, code completion on a method name is the quickest way to work
> > through chained query options. An enum argument is also workable,
> > but extra typing. But a generic type like int or boolean makes it
> > difficult to figure out what to specify without looking up the
> > documentation.
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Andrus Adamchik
> > <and...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> >> enum also makes it needlessly verbose :-/
> >>
> >> But yeah, I take your point.
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Nov 21, 2014, at 5:56 PM, Michael Gentry <mgen...@masslight.net>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I'd avoid true/false for that purpose. We had the same thing in
> >>> orderings before I changed it to an enum. I'd specify it in the
> >>> method name or use an enum that makes sense when reading it.
> >>>
> >>> mrg
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Andrus Adamchik <
> and...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> >>>>> So are you thinking something like:
> >>>>> Artist.ARTIST_NAME.contains("Van")?
> >>>>
> >>>> yep.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Also, what about
> >>>>> case-insensitive?
> >>>>
> >>>> Probably as a second true/false argument? I started to dislike the
> look of "likeIgnoreCase" recently :)
> >>>>
> >>>> Property.contains(string);
> >>>> Property.contains(string, true);
> >>>> Property.contains(string, false);
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Andrus
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Nov 21, 2014, at 5:33 PM, Michael Gentry <mgen...@masslight.net>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I 'like' this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So are you thinking something like:
> >>>>> Artist.ARTIST_NAME.contains("Van")? Also, what about
> >>>>> case-insensitive?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> mrg
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Andrus Adamchik <
> and...@objectstyle.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> Another API idea that I just had while analyzing boilerplate code
> of the client Cayenne apps. An argument to Property.like(..) (or second
> argument to ExpressionFactory.likeExp(..)) requires a full pattern to match
> against. So people would often write their own utility code to wrap a
> String in "%" signs. Cayenne can easily take care of this via the following
> methods:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Property.contains(string);
> >>>>>> // same as Property.like("%" + string + "%");
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Property.startsWith(string);
> >>>>>> // same as Property.like(string + "%");
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Property.endsWith(string);
> >>>>>> // same as Property.like("%" + string);
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In addition to saving the user from String concatenation, these new
> methods can do proper symbol escaping, making "like" much safer to use.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Andrus
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
