That's funny, I just checked out the wip-record2-dpp branch this morning to start looking at it :) So far, I really like what I see. I would agree with Tim on calling it Persistable... vs DB... but otherwise it's looking very good. If I have some time this week I might start looking at how to meld this with JPA.
One thing I've been thinking about is that I think there may be a little dissonance in lifecycle between what we do in JPA and what we'd do in JDBC. For instance, in JPA, entity state is managed by the provider; there's no need to explicitly save an object per se, because the provider will automatically detect changes to the managed instance and send those changes to the DB. That means that if you make a change and decide you don't want to save it then you need to explicitly *revert* the object or the changes will get pushed to the database at the end of the session. Off the top of my head I don't think this is going to be a huge issue but I'm going to have to go through it a few times from both angles (JPA style vs Mapper style) to make sure that I don't have any undefined or anti-defined behavior. Cheers, Derek On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Marius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > All, > > I just committed in master the code for generic support for Record/ > Field. David will start adding JDBC spices soon. > > Perhaps there a a couple of more field "types" to add so please take a > look and let us know your thoughts. > > Br's, > Marius > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
