2016-07-17 5:09 GMT+02:00 Carsten Langsdorf <[email protected]>:
> I tried the flag, and it does not seem to work. It had been attributed as > experimental anyway. > > Concerning my db identifiers and the resulting class names - yep, I could > use double quotes. That would imply I'd have to pass all my automatically > generated scripts through another batch edit layer, and weighing the > potential error source I would also introduce against the benefit makes me > think I might be better off just sticking to plain unmodified uppercase and > focusing on more crucial tasks. > That sounds like an excellent plan :) > One of which is another thing you might be able to give me a hint about. > I'm using JavaFX via FXML for the client, and it's a plain desktop > application. The database is strictly local, and I'm using H2 in embedded > mode. The next thing I'm pondering about is whether I should stick with > jOOQ alone to drive the JavaFX controls efficiently and elegantly, or I > should also use DataFX or similar. Also, I'm not familiar with DataFX yet > and thus don't know how well it would work in conjunction with jOOQ. > > Any insights/hints on that one? > Hmm, I personally don't have much experience with JavaFX / DataFX, but from what I can tell, DataFX doesn't seem to add a lot of functionality between JavaFX and an RDBMS. When I had written our JavaFX example, I hadn't found the direct integration (e.g. by using Java 8 functional programming constructs for the mapping) very difficult: https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/tree/master/jOOQ-examples/jOOQ-javafx-example It would be certainly very interesting in learning more about best integration practices. -- 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.
