No attributes from us, sorry. You shouldn't have to make any changes to your entity on our behalf. I'm cooking something up, should be ready soon.
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 9:24 PM, Greg Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > agreed... > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Kasper22 <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> @Greg - I based my example on having not seen any use of attributes in >> the documentation or in the src. I completely agree with your idea, >> attributes would be more straight forward. >> >> @James - That's a bummer. Luckily I only have one property that needs >> to be ignored at this point so it's not an issue for me. >> >> I would like to see something like an Ignore attribute, because I >> think ignoring would be less common than marking properties as >> persisted. Which if I had to mark 90% with an attribute of include, >> then I would feel like I was doing a lot of extra work. I'm thinking >> like XmlSerializer where you can use XmlIgnore. >> >> On Jul 29, 3:20 pm, James Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: >> > You currently can't do what you're asking, which sucks. The whole >> > ForTypesThatDeriveFrom and Overrides behavior is fundamentally flawed >> and >> > we're planning on sorting the whole deal out post 1.0; I'm going to have >> a >> > think and see if I can't come up with something for the time being. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Greg Cook <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > I'm wondering if there isn't a better way to 'marking' a field as >> > > "Persistable" using an Attribute for example.I hate having hidden >> meanings >> > > in the names of my fields/properties. >> > >> > > In your convention you could ignore any property/field that does not >> have >> > > the "Persistable" attribute on it... >> > > It would be more intent revealing and obvious versus having a 'Fld' as >> a >> > > descriminator... >> > >> > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Kasper22 <[email protected] >> >wrote: >> > >> > >> Hi, >> > >> > >> I was wondering if there is a way to do a blanket ignore property >> > >> using auto mapping and conventions? I've found I can ignore >> > >> properties on one class with ForTypesThatDeriveFrom<> method, but I >> > >> would like to set up a more general rule. Basically, if a property >> > >> doesn't start with "Fld" I don't want to map it. >> > >> > >> Is something like that possible? >> > >> > >> Thanks, >> > >> Bryan >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fluent NHibernate" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fluent-nhibernate?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
