Thanks for your suggestion, I think it is a good idea, but I have to analyse how that will affect other things.
FYI, we have recently changed the naming conventions for foreign key columns: http://www.fornax-platform.org/tracker/browse/CSC-179 /Patrik Andreas Voss wrote: > > Hi all, > > we have a large CRUD application modeled in a proprietary system (actually > C based, not Java) that I'd like to regenerate with Sculptor. I was able > to convert the proprietary models into ecore and I'm quite confident that > I could write oaw transformations that create either the sculptor dsl > model (ecore) or the sculptor meta model directly. > > I've seen in DatabaseGenerationHelper#getDatabaseName(), that Sculptor > uses the model names for the database tables and colums in the code > generation phase. This does not work for my models, the database already > exists and the database names are different from the model names. I > believe that this problem is very common, many projects have to deal with > existing databases containing ugly names. > > Wouldn't it be better to add the database names and types into the > metamodel, and have a separate transformation that assigns values to them? > Then I could replace that transformation with my own and assign the values > of the existing database. > > Thanks, > Andreas > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-Sculptor--column-names-for-existing-database--tp15177242s17564p15178223.html Sent from the Fornax-Platform mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Fornax-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fornax-developer
