On Monday, April 28, 2014 7:25:46 AM UTC-7, Lukas Eder wrote: > > > 2014-04-28 15:35 GMT+02:00 Garret Wilson <[email protected]<javascript:> > >: > >> 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. >> > > I'll trade your tiny minority of people that produce collisions with > special characters against my tiny minority of people who use special > characters in object names more than very occasionally :-) >
I think you grandly misinterpreted what I was saying. In no way am I saying not to encode special characters. I am not even asserting that people who use special characters are a minority. What I was saying is that the people who use name their fields in such a way as to generate conflicts with a naive encoding strategy (e.g. someone who would name their columns "foo:bar", "foo$bar" and "foo@bar" in the same table) must be a very small number of people---and those few people would surely not be surprised if the default naming strategy produced conflicts. By no means turn off some sort of replacement of special characters. I just think that the few people who do something that is confusing anyway (using names that conflict when replacing special characters) wouldn't mind the extra step of setting a "uriCodeSpecialCharacters" switch, and it wouldn't make the generated classes all ugly for those of us using special characters in a reasonable, non-conflicting way. Just my opinion. If the workaround (below) works, it will work for me. The point of jOOQ is to make things easy, pretty, and understandable; and I'm just trying to provide feedback to further that goal. Cheers! -- 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.
