I agree with Larry 100% on this one. Implicit behaviour is the enemy of maintainable software.
Clinton On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 06:17:21 -0700, Larry Meadors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 13:07:43 +1100, Huy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Larry Meadors wrote: > > > Just curious: If you can have null values, why are you using primitive > > > values. > > > > Well primitives are easier to work with in Java IMO. > > Not if you need null support. :-) > > Which do you need more? Null support or ease of use? You do not get > both, and not even the autoboxing in jdk5 will fix that. > > > > You do realize that even if we do not call the setter, the > > > property holder will be set to 0 anyway, right? > > > > Which I guess is the point, so why do we have to specify this in sqlmap. > > So we do not have to force that decision upon other users of the framework. > > IMO, this is not what I would expect from the tool. If there is a null > in a field that cannot accurately represent null values, I want an > error. I want a big, nasty error that makes the lights in the server > room flicker, and sets off alarms. The *last* thing I want is for my > framework to assume that it is supposed to be zero, and just happily > chug along. > > Larry >
