I want to ask about the ".withRecords(true)" Functionality of the
Jooq-Codegenerator...
- is it possible to let those Pojos (which are generated as java14-records)
adhere to some specification, that makes sure that whenever the
db-table-schema changes i get a error in my IDE to see that i need to:
- add a field
- remove a field
- rename a field
With specification a Java-Interface would be optimal.
I guess the Java-Interface should work if it defines the default-getters of
the java14-records.
For example:
public interface PersonSpec { String name(); int age(); }
public record Person(String name, int age) implements PersonSpec {
// No additional methods needed; the record already provides them.
}
---
i currently think about using java14-Records instead of normal Pojos (with
getters/setters) because the getters/setters can be harder to review in
merge-requests. The getters/setters are often so much code that the
review-person in the merge-request has much to review, while it would only
be fields.
But i don't want to loose the advantage of letting the Pojo implement and
interface, which makes sure that if my db-table changes its schema i am
forced to also fix the Pojo for that.
--
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 jooq-user+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jooq-user/c2fa6bd1-d999-452c-8a15-80a481680d90n%40googlegroups.com.
