Hello, 2013/8/26 Christian Hammers <[email protected]>
> Hello > > On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 06:22:42 -0700 (PDT) > [email protected] wrote: > > ... > > From my point of view, there should be a configuration option that > > specifies a skeleton for a specific class. > > A skeleton enum/class file must then contain code, but NOT the enum > values > > definition, which will be generated by JOOQ. > > If that's to hard to implement, maybe the implementation of the recently > discussed "abstract" classes from https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/2705 > could help. There one could add custom setters that convert values, e.g.: > > class MyTable extends BaseMyTable { > setDOW(WeekDayEnums e) { > super.setDOW(e.getValue() - 1); // for integer starting with 0 > } > I think that a Converter would be more appropriate and reusable to effectively map a Java enum value to a database value for such translation. Note that setDOW(e) is just convenience for setValue([columnindex], e). Hence, this solution is likely to cause inconsistencies between the various ways of interacting with a record. > > I have read the documentation concerning the enum converters. > > > http://www.jooq.org/doc/3.1/manual/sql-execution/fetching/data-type-conversion/ > > If you use PostgreSQL then enums are custom types and you could maybe > force JOOQ to use your custom converter class to translate those to > e.g. java.util.Date: > http://www.jooq.org/doc/3.1/manual-single-page/#custom-data-types Precisely Cheers Lukas -- 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.
