> > Thus, I'll suggest (and also make a patch as I get to it) that it > > should be optional to have the dependency on commons-lang. > Optimal, we > > could generate a bare-boned toString method based on the > > attributes/properties know to the metadata. > > > > On second thought - I'll add an option to either have the > codegenerator use the methods provided by commons-lang OR not > do anything at all :) > > The "do nothing" option is for those who want to have either > a base or their own custom subclass for their classes (nicely > supported by my metaattribute patch :)
>Yes, I'm happy to agree to that in the case of toString(). Yup!. >However, in the case of equals() and hashCode() for composite-id >classes, we actually *need* them. (Its required by Hibernate.) >I would much prefer the commons-lang dependency to trying to >fully generate the equals() and hashCode() methods (thats >actually *more* complicated). Yup! >And after this discussion, I'm leaning toward the view that >generated entity classes should implement equals() had hashCode() >consistent with identifier equality, though I suppose that should >also be optional. Yup! > > And what about the meta-attribute thingy ? (it is not that a big > > codechange compared to the recent commit :) (i'm just > pushing here :) > > How about adding the meta-attribute thingy as an extra X-mas > gift - it would instantly make me happy, and the > codegenerator so much more better :) >After this discussion I'm finally satisfied that this is a >requirement if CodeGenerator is to become really useful. So I'm >perfectly happy to allow things like: Ok - an even more powerfull meta, than my patch :) I'll start doing it right now :) ><class name="Foo" ... > > <meta attribute="description">JavaDoc comment for Foo</meta> > <meta attribute="base-class">AbstractPersistent</meta> > <meta attribute="generated-class">FooBase</meta> Okey - I get this one....(and those class references are meant to be fully qualified names, right ?) I'll even put in another one (the one that I currently need :) <meta attribute="implements">Validatable</meta> <meta attribute="implements">Auditable</meta> or should that be <meta attribute="implements">Validatable, Auditable</meta> > <property name="bar" type="serializable" ....> > <meta attribute="description"> > JavaDoc comment for getBar() > </meta> > <meta attribute="java-type">java.lang.Object</meta> > </property> > ..... But this one ? Isn't this a bit "cloudy".... If I understand this correctly you want that if "java-type" is provided the codegenerator should use that type instead of the type specified in the property....Just curious, when is that usefull ? ></class> >The only bad thing about <meta> is its not very well self-documenting. >So we will really need a page of documentation about CodeGenerator. I'll be happy to do both :) >Particularly since it is now maturing quite nicely :) Yes - it is isn't :) /max ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ hibernate-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hibernate-devel
