> Did something specific jump up as "seemingly-in-progress code"?
Hmm... the following issues come to mind: - A number of methods have comments that trail off in mid-sentence - it's not clear what classes are published APIs vs. internal-only - there are a number of new public fields in some of the new classes, which just seems odd stylistically. - there are a number of unused public methods in classes that are not designated as being published I haven't done a thorough focused review, though, so these are mostly just first-impression sorts of things. -Patrick On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Pinaki Poddar<[email protected]> wrote: > > Good to see you back., Patrick. > > Metamodel, Criteria etc are work-in-progress. There are "known unknowns" and > surely there are "unknown unknowns" -- and a regular churn of spec API. The > objective measure of their status is the available unit tests. Some existing > applications have migrated their JPQL queries to strongly-typed version of > Criteria (i.e. based on canonical, instantiated static metamodel classes) > with no major shortcomings or surprises. But I can not comment on the > complexity of these JPQL queries. Currently Criteria is tested against 450 > odd unit tests -- out of that roughly 300 would be using strong-typed > version. > You can find the tests in ....openjpa.persistence.criteria.* packages... > > Did something specific jump up as "seemingly-in-progress code"? > > > > ----- > Pinaki > -- > View this message in context: > http://n2.nabble.com/new-JPA2-features-tp3607731p3608505.html > Sent from the OpenJPA Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Patrick Linskey 202 669 5907
