Thanks, clear now. For me paging in the UI delegated to paging in the Query, but now I prefer your idea of "range" in the Query.
On 6 Feb 2013, at 09:48, Jeroen van der Wal <[email protected]> wrote: > You misinterpreted my comment: the concept of paging is something that > lives in the context of a viewer. When it comes to querying data I prefer > to reuse the word range over paging. So the paging feature of a viewer > would call a range feature in the query class. > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Mike Burton <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Sorry to be brief >> See "Paging is IMHO..." Below >> >> Best Regards >> >> Mike Burton >> (Sent from my iPhone) >> >> >> On 6 Feb 2013, at 08:46, Jeroen van der Wal <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Dan Haywood < >> [email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> On 6 February 2013 02:16, Kevin Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Dan, >>>> >>>>> >>>>> So, sure, I guess I can look into enhancing QueryAbstract with optional >>>>> parameters. >>>> +1 >>> +1 too >>> >>>> >>>> How about a new withPaging(start, count) method, eg: >>>> >>>> public class QueryAbstract { >>>> >>>> ... >>>> public QueryAbstract withPaging(int start, int count) { >>>> this.start = start; >>>> this.count = count; >>>> return this; >>>> } >>>> >>>> } >>> Paging is IMHO a concept that lives in the viewer. >> >> Doesn't sound right to me, would that mean viewer needed to fetch whole >> set then chop it into pages? >> >>> When it comes to >>> querying data I opt to adapt the JDO concept "Range" [1] i.e. >> setRange(int >>> start, int end) or withRange(int start, int end) >>> >>> [1] >>> >> http://db.apache.org/jdo/api20/apidocs/javax/jdo/Query.html#setRange(long, >>> long) >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Does anyone have anything to add regarding method signature? Start and >>>>> count vs start and end, for example? I think start and cound is more >>>>> obvious (and couples with the paging annotation). >>>> >>>> I'm happy with those names (rather than start/end) >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> As for your other question: I used "find by pattern" quite nicely in my >>>>> deployed app, so I'd like to see it preserved. Find by title is a >> simple >>>>> specific implementation of pattern, but could be useful... dunno. >>>>> >>>>> OK, thx. The thing about search by title is that - to be efficient - >> it >>>> requires that the objectstore has persisted the title in a column >>>> somewhere. I'd rather that the programmer decides to do this >> explicitly >>>> (eg by having a hidden property that holds the title and search on that) >>>> than have the framework do some magic. >>>> >>>> ie, if the programmer really wants to support search by title, they can >>>> just do: >>>> >>>> public class ToDoItem { >>>> >>>> >>>> @Title >>>> @Hidden >>>> public String getTitle() { ... } >>>> public void setTitle(String t) { ... } >>>> >>>> private void recomputeTitle() { // call whenever a component part >> of >>>> title has changed >>>> setTitle(....); >>>> } >>>> >>>> } >>>> >>>> Dan >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>>> Kevin >>>> >>
