The issue was raised to me via Dali. Based on this discussion I'd say that their metamodel generator handles byte[] correctly, suggesting they add a feature to use ours seems a bit backwards.
I suspect that fixing it would be more difficult than I'd like. That said, we don't persist generic arrays unless they use @PersistentCollection, if we have FieldMetaData whenever we make a decision, it shouldn't be too bad. -mike On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Pinaki Poddar <[email protected]> wrote: > You also mentioned that the canonical metamodel must match what Dali > decided > for byte[] as SingularAttibute (which, of course, is a gray area because > JPA > spec is almost silent about arrays of any component type). In fact, Dali > folks, if they have provision for each vendor, allow the vendo to generate > these metamodel classes rather than generating by themselves o using a > specific providers tooling. > > But given that ali-compliance is also a 'requirement', the source code > generation of annotation processor also needs to be tweaked. My hunch is > treating arrays differently based on its component type is not going to be > pretty overall. > > ----- > Pinaki > -- > View this message in context: > http://openjpa.208410.n2.nabble.com/Metamodel-generates-ListAttribute-for-arrays-instead-of-SingularAttribute-tp6529049p6533943.html > Sent from the OpenJPA Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
