Hi Patrick,

On Mar 30, 2005, at 4:28 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:

Well, we already have:

public ByteIdentity(Class target, String s) {
        this (pcClass, Byte.parseByte(justTheId(str)));
}

This was not the question. Matthew asked about:

public ByteIdentity(String s)

which doesn't make sense because you would construct an instance of a JDO identity class that didn't know what kind of object it was the key for. If all you want is a wrapper around a byte, use java.lang.Byte. The key piece of the ByteIdentity is that an instance unambiguously represents the identity of a particular instance in the datastore (and cache).

Craig

where clearly, justTheId() can go away now.

-Patrick

On Mar 30, 2005, at 7:22 PM, Matthew T. Adams wrote:

If we get rid of the targetClassName in the toString() return value,
does that make it easier to provide overloaded String-arg constructors
on the SingleFieldIdentity subclasses (except StringIdentity of course,
which already has a String-arg constructor)? For example,

// in class ByteIdentity
public ByteIdentity(String s) {
    this(Byte.parseByte(s));
}

...

This might be convenient, letting Xxx.parseXxx(String) throw whatever it
may.

Thoughts?

--matthew

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew T. Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 4:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: SingleFieldIdentity.toString()


I agree as well. I thought it was there for some reason that I didn't
remember or couldn't figure out.

--matthew

"Wes Biggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
Abe White wrote:


I thought it would be nice for debugging to see the target class
name
in the toString.


I'm against this. It makes ids in URLs longer, makes parsing
harder,
and is unnecessary in general, IMO.  It also leads to possible
inconsistencies with the class encoded in the string and the class
given to the String constructor.

I'm with Abe.

Wes






-- Patrick Linskey SolarMetric Inc.


Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



Reply via email to