LOL, would a rose by any other name smell as sweet ........
As already noted trying to come up with an alternative to "Factory" when in
fact it does more than your average factory as its a general entry point is
never going to result in a clean 'fix'.
The options I can come up with are
JOOQ
So the example given in a another reply ends up reading
executor.select(JOOQ.max(TABLE.ID)).from(TABLE)...
It makes the code clear to any coder who knows what JOOQ is and how it
works, but does not help on the web searching or 'intent' **, so
JOOQFactory
seems the next best option, with the example reading
executor.select(JOOQFactory.max(TABLE.ID)).from(TABLE)...
This would work well for searches, code completion editors and retain the
indication of 'intent'.
Roger
** I like 'here be dragons' coding where if you don't understand you go and
read up, rather than 'try your best' :)
On Tuesday, April 2, 2013 8:27:32 PM UTC+1, Lukas Eder wrote:
>
> Dear group,
>
> It has been brought to my attention that using "Factory" as a name for
> the jOOQ DSL entry point might not be the optimal choice. You will
> find details about this request in this thread here [1].
>
> I understand the arguments brought up by Christopher Deckers, which are
> mainly:
>
> 1. The name is too generic to be linked to jOOQ
> 2. The name is too generic to be used easily in auto imports, code
> navigation, Google searches
>
> I personally did not agree with the above because of
>
> 1. The class is in a package, which clearly links it to jOOQ
> 2. The class is in a package, which clearly links it to jOOQ
> (except for auto imports)
>
> But I may not suffer from the same pain as you, the users. Also I'm
> curious about the potential of finding a better name.
>
> So please, if you feel either way (pro / contra "Factory"), bring up
> your arguments in favour / against the current name. If you're against
> it, please also bring up a compelling alternative. By "compelling", I
> don't mean things like "Builder", "SQL", "API", but something that
> clearly communicates the intent of the "Factory", which are two
> things:
>
> - Being the single point of entry for the jOOQ DSL
> - Being the single "factory" for constructing jOOQ QueryParts,
> functions, bind values, etc.
>
> As of jOOQ 3.0, the Factory is no longer:
>
> - An entity holding "contextual" information about JDBC Connections,
> DataSources, Settings, SQLDialect. This information has been moved
> outside of the Factory in jOOQ 3.0 and is off-topic for this
> brainstorming.
>
> More info about the Factory can be found here [2] and here [3]
>
> Let's try to get to a conclusion until Sunday, April 7.
>
> Cheers
> Lukas
>
> [1]:
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/jooq-user/uxcYEC7IoDM
> [2]: http://www.jooq.org/javadoc/latest/org/jooq/impl/Factory.html
> [3]: http://www.jooq.org/doc/3.0/manual/sql-building/factory
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ
User Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
