Cool. I guess I'm editing my chapter this afternoon now :) On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:40 PM, David Pollak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:33 AM, Derek Chen-Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> I'm mostly done with the rough draft of our Record/Mapper chapter and I >> wanted to clarify a few points to make sure that my reading of the docs and >> code is accurate: >> >> 1. ByRef appears to me to essentially be an old-style join (using the >> where clause instead of join syntax). Is that accurate? Are there other >> use >> cases? >> >> > This allows you to compare two columns in the same row. Because mapper > does not allow for explicit joins or queries against more than one table at > once (with the exception of the In construct), there's no "old style join" > stuff. > > I've also changed the Join() QueryParam to PreCache... which is more > descriptive of what it does. > > >> >> 1. >> 2. It looks like the only way to get distinct results would be to use >> the findAllByPreparedStatement or findAllByInsecureSql methods. Is there >> some other way to do this that I'm missing? >> >> Or perhaps the Distrinct() QueryParam I just added. :-) > > >> >> 1. >> 2. The toForm method in Mapper has an overload that takes a >> redoSnippet. What is the use case for this? >> >> So you can keep the current state around over the course of multiple form > submissions when the validation fails. > >> >> 1. Will it be supported in Record or has that functionality been >> folded into something else? >> >> I hope it will make it into Record/Field. > >> >> 1. >> 2. It appears that the functionality of the buildSet... methods in >> MappedField has effectievly been replaced by the setFromAny in Field. Is >> this the case, or will those buildSet functions show back up in some >> subclass of field (it seems like there was a lot of overlap there) >> >> buildSet is JDBC specific and radically improves performance in converting > a JDBC column to something that can be put into a field. > >> >> 1. >> 2. Am I reading correctly that Record no longer retains the orginal >> value of a field when it's changed, but rather just flags the field as >> dirty? (there are no is/was methods on Field) >> >> Probably... but there will be is/was on Field. It's a very helpful > construct. > >> >> 1. >> >> These last two make sense to me since it seems like duplicated effort for >> #4 and not much of a use case on #5 that I can think of. Any info or >> comments would be appreciated! > > > Sure... wait a few minutes for my Distinct() checkin to make it to GitHub > > >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Derek >> >> >> > > > -- > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net > Collaborative Task Management http://much4.us > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp > Git some: http://github.com/dpp > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
