Thanks for asking that question.
We have to be VERY clear. These are NOT DAOs! Nor are they a replacement for DAOs. DAOs are coarse grained classes. Mappers are more fine grained.
You're right, you would have another set of interfaces, and to some people this may be too many. I agree.
In a modern layered architecture you might have:
[ Presentation ]
[ Service ]
[ DAO ]
[ Mapper ]
If I were to collapse any part of that layering strategy, I would collapse DAO. This mapper implementation would allow you to collapse the DAO layer (i.e. get rid of it) while still maintaining a cleaner interface. You would still lose the advantage of DAO, but not all applications need DAO.
This is another design alternative. It can be used with DAO, or without.
Cheers,
Clinton
On 5/22/05, Aitor Imaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So if I understand correctly, the mapper class will select the
appropriate interface by looking at the statement name? It could by a
nice addition, although I think it might have the risk of requiring too
many interface files. Also, what would happen with the current SqlMap
Dao templates?
Aitor
