Lukas, Joachim,
Ah well, it seems I overlooked the sarcasm "I'm looking forward to tons of >> feedback from you, once you're starting to delve into details..." >> Silly me. >> > This looked to me more like tongue-in-cheek or teasing. I do that all the time and I know Lukas does it to. That is not personal at all, rather, to keep the discussions light and witty. But come back to the discussion! I am very interested in this subject, so I would really like you to go on explaining your approach. > 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. > Essentially: - What are Record objects? - Are these Record objects oriented toward the database access (persistence layer) or to be passed to the business layer? And again: - What is the recommended way with jOOQ to consume/create/feed business objects? Please share your ideas and expectations! Cheers, -Christopher -- 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.
