On Jun 27, 2008, at 11:57 AM, David Blevins wrote:
[psst, update your openejb-dev mail alias, it's still using [EMAIL PROTECTED]
]
On Jun 27, 2008, at 6:33 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
I've been trying to understand and document how the CMP-JPA
integration works, and I've found something in the CMP2 code that
has me confused. In the mapClass2X() method in CmpJmpConversion,
the code derives the names of the CMP field mappings by looking for
abstract "get" and "is" methods in the bean class. However, in the
createGetter() method in Cmp2Generator, the getter name is always
generated using a "get" prefix. Shouldn't this be checking to see
if the abstract method is an "is" method and generate the
appropriate one? The current code would appear to generate a non-
instantiable class if the source bean is using "is" methods.
I added the "is" logic in there and I'm not sure at all if it is
compliant. I guess that'd be the first question. Second one might
be, if we do it anyway, will it mess up JPA? If the answers are yes
and no respectively, we definitely should. If the answers are no
and no, then we still could if we wanted to add it as an extra
feature.
In CMP-JPA, we configure JPA not use the getters or setters, but
instead it accesses the field directly. The main reason for this is
because the CMR getter/setter is defined in terms of the EJB local
interface which JPA doesn't understand.
-dain
