Hi Matthew,
Provided that we could use "import" or "IMPORT", that would be fine.
this would be the first case that we support a Java keyword in its upper
case form. According to the spec keywords include Java keywords and
JDOQL keywords. Only the JDOQL keywords have an all-lower-case and an
all-upper-case form. So support for the upper case version IMPORT seems
to be inconsistent with the above rule.
An alternative, although not so compatible between the API and string
versions, is to support the keyword "import" followed by a comma-separated,
semicolon-terminated list of imports:
I don't have a strong opinion about the comma separation, but if we want
to support this we need to do the same for the declaration of variables.
What I really do not like is making a difference between the API version
and the single-string representation of a JDOQL query. This is confusing
for the user and requires two different implementations of the import
handling.
I support the original proposal which just skips the keyword IMPORTS.
Regards Michael
SELECT UNIQUE firstname, lastname
INTO FullName
FROM Employee
WHERE salary > 1000 && projects.contains(p) && p.budget > 30000
VARIABLES Project p
IMPORT org.apache.jdo.tck.query.result.classes.FullName,
org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Person, org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Project;
If we updated the spec (14.6.4) to allow this comma-separated,
semicolon-terminated list in addition to the initial syntax, I think it
would be intuitive:
<proposal>
14.6.4 Import statements
The import statements follow the Java syntax for import statements. Import
on demand is
supported.
Additionally, import statements may be expressed as a comma-separated,
semicolon-terminated list of elements. For example, both
import org.example.Foo;
import org.example.Bar;
import org.example.util.*;
and
import org.example.Foo, org.example.Bar, org.example.util.*;
would be supported.
</proposal>
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 7:01 PM
To: JDO Expert Group; Apache JDO project
Subject: Issue 152: Redundant IMPORTS keyword
Javadogs,
The keyword IMPORTS seems to be redundant. It introduces a series of
statements each of which begins "import ...;". The keyword import could
stand alone without the introductory IMPORTS.
I think it would be better if we omitted the IMPORTS keyword entirely, so
e.g. instead of:
SELECT UNIQUE firstname, lastname
INTO FullName
FROM Employee
WHERE salary > 1000 && projects.contains(p) && p.budget > 30000
VARIABLES Project p
IMPORTS import org.apache.jdo.tck.query.result.classes.FullName;
import org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Person
import org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Project;
we would have:
SELECT UNIQUE firstname, lastname
INTO FullName
FROM Employee
WHERE salary > 1000 && projects.contains(p) && p.budget > 30000
VARIABLES Project p
import org.apache.jdo.tck.query.result.classes.FullName;
import org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Person
import org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Project;
Craig
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!
--
Michael Bouschen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Engineering GmbH
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.tech.spree.de/
Tel.:++49/30/235 520-33 Buelowstr. 66
Fax.:++49/30/2175 2012 D-10783 Berlin
