Hi Daniele, I'm sorry for the delay.
2013/10/11 Daniele Antonini <[email protected]> > Hi Lukas, > Jonathan ask me to write a test to reproduce the problem with Jooq & > ModelMapper. > I have created a full eclipse maven project. > I attach the file here to completeness. > Thank you for taking the time. Interesting to see this integration in action > > Il giorno giovedì 10 ottobre 2013 15:33:51 UTC, Lukas Eder ha scritto: >> >> Hi Daniele, >> >> 2013/10/10 Daniele Antonini <[email protected]> >> >> I'm increasingly convinced that is a problem of ModelMapper. >>> I find this model mapper issue: https://github.com/** >>> jhalterman/modelmapper/issues/**13<https://github.com/jhalterman/modelmapper/issues/13> >>> >>> I've attached a test to reproduce the problem. >>> The test shows that you cannot use an interface as properties source to >>> map properties. >>> So I bypassed the problem using implementation class. >>> >> >> Great. Will be good to see how that sorts out with Jonathan from >> ModelMapper. How has the integration experience been so far? Do you have >> any general suggestions for jOOQ and/or for ModelMapper? >> > > The integration is quite simple (I have to fix a 'bug' in > RecordValueReader) . If you have similar data structure (record <-> pojo), > the integration is like a charm. > > But when data structures are (very) dissimilar, mapping can be difficult > (or a pain) and require extra effort in mapping and (mainly) testing. > Infact, all problems I've ecountered are related to use of ModelMapper not > to Jooq. > OK, so that will keep Jonathan busy for a bit :-) Cheers Lukas > > Cheers > Daniele > >> >>> Il giorno mercoledì 9 ottobre 2013 14:48:31 UTC, Lukas Eder ha scritto: >>> >>>> I'm not sure what you mean by this. >>>> >>>>> But in Jooq 3.1.0 RecordImpl class is a package protected, so I need >>>>> to “patch” it including this one in my source code tree and set the public >>>>> visibility. >>>>> >>>> >>> I copied org.jooq.impl.RecordImpl java file from jooq sources, into my >>> project, and then I have changed class vibility: >>> public class RecordImpl .... { >>> //class code remains unchanged >>> } >>> >>> Why do you need to patch RecordImpl? I don't see this from your >>>> example, above... >>>> >>>>> Can you make this class public? >>>>> >>>> Nope :-) >>>> Most classes in the org.jooq.impl package are package-private for a >>>> good reason. I do not want to maintain an internal API through semantic >>>> versioning. >>>> >>> >>> Good point. >>> I agree with you :) >>> >> -- > 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. > -- 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.
