On Sunday, April 27, 2014 11:44:26 PM UTC-7, Lukas Eder wrote: > > ... > This is the general name mangling strategy to avoid conflicts when someone > has all of foo:bar, foo_bar, and foo?bar columns. This was implemented in > jOOQ 3.3.0: > https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/2016 >
Hmmm... I empathize with the intent, but ... I'm not sure it should be the default behavior if ease-of-use is the goal. I'd imagine that the type of conflicts you mention are a tiny minority of cases. I'd recommend changing all invalid characters to '_' as you *used* to do, and allowing a simple flag for turning on/off illegal character URI-encoding. > ... > Or your own programmatic strategies: > > http://www.jooq.org/doc/latest/manual/code-generation/codegen-generatorstrategy/ > Ooh, that looks promising! Thanks! I'll investigate that immediately. > ... > I'm aware that you've used the term "show-stopper" before for something > that might have not appeared like a critical issue in ordinary contexts. I > personally believe that this name-mangling scheme isn't such a critical > issue. > I'm not aware that I've used the term "show-stopper" at any time related to jOOQ. This particular behavior in no way a show-stopper, and never meant to imply such. I only said that having method names with arbitrary characters (seemingly) having nothing to do with the column name wouldn't help the library sell well to the team. (Currently I'm the sole person using and evangelizing jOOQ on my team.) In any case, your reply (as usual) has been quick, accurate, and helpful. Thanks so much! Garret -- 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/d/optout.
