On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Ben Hood <[email protected]> wrote:
> Admittedly it does use the CRUDy part of JOOQ (it would be nicer if it
> could just be an option on the plain jane fluent API), but it seems to
> do the job.

Actually I've decided I don't like this solution much because it
circumvents the whole type safety thing, which is the main reason to
use JOOQ in the first place. I wonder if there is a type safe solution
for this.

-- 
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.

Reply via email to