> If I understand correctly, the fear is that > because there is no formal way of mapping > business objects to database relations, this > subclassing feature could wrongly become the > business object to database relations mapping > if abused?
Not sure whether that's just a different way to restate the problem, or something different. Let me try to rephrase: The proposal is to move field accessors into superclasses of the business classes (for good reasons actually). The issue is that if the business class is already a subclass of another business class, it would now need to inherit both from there and from the new field accessor class. Java does not offer multiple inheritance in that way, so this will fail with compiler errors. -- 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.
