I guess if you add all the _simple_ features in a "SimpleNamingStrategy" 
(having "Simple" in the name will be important *lol* ) it will be obvious 
to people that it will cover only the most basic use cases and you will not 
raise a maintenance nightmare :-)

This should satisfy 98% of all jOOQ users with very little work required.

What you think?


Am Dienstag, 8. Januar 2013 12:21:00 UTC+1 schrieb Lukas Eder:
>
> Hi Peter, 
>
> > Altering the naming in case of using the maven plugin is a little 
> cumbersome 
> > since you need to define the custom naming scheme in an additional, 
> external 
> > dependency / module. Having the naming scheme in the same module as the 
> > generator plugin will not work since the generator will execute _before_ 
> > maven starts compiling the java files. 
>
> I'm aware of this issue. I had asked a Stack Overflow question to get 
> some input on the matter, some time ago: 
> http://stackoverflow.com/q/10322155/521799 
>
> However, that's how Maven works. I guess, one can get used to it... 
>
> > I think the usecase of adding a prefix to the class is name is so useful 
> > that I suggest adding something like 'PrefixNamingGenerator' in 
> jooq-util. 
> > Especially when running side-by-side with JPA or Hibernate since 
> entities 
> > usually have the same names as the jOOQ classes which is very 
> > inconvenient.This would be similar to querydsl settings 
> 'querydsl.prefix' 
> > (
> http://www.querydsl.com/static/querydsl/2.2.0/reference/html/ch03s02.html) 
>
> > which by default uses prefix 'Q'. 
>
> Yes, this has been requested before: 
> https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/408 
> https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/830 
> https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/1126 
> https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/1171 
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/jooq-user/o_eN0g6XjyM/EGFHy6DMpy4J 
>
> As you can see in #408 and #1126, users tend not to stop at wanting 
> prefixes. At some point, they will want suffixes, and then both, and 
> then CamelCasing vs. UNDERSCORE_NOTATION. And then, they will want 
> different prefixes for tables and for records, but no prefixes for 
> table references... :-) 
>
> NamingStrategy already covers all that with no additional maintenance 
> effort for me :-) At some point, I will implement #1171, which is 
> probably the most generic way to handle this seemingly simple feature 
> request of adding prefixes (and then suffixes and then renaming and 
> then...). In fact, it is an XML-based way to configure a Java 
> NamingStrategy implementation. 
>
> > Marking all jOOQ classes with an capital 'J' would be cool for me and I 
> > could easily lookup jOOQ classes by typing 'J' in the type search of 
> IDEA or 
> > eclipse :-) 
>
> Yes, I can see the usefulness of that. 
>

Reply via email to