Seems like middlegen handles cases where two tables have more than one FK relationship in the same direction by adding the FK field to the relationship names, whereas a single relationship bewteen two tables results in a relationship name put together by the two table names and some stuff in between. However, if I have, between my two tables, one one-to- many and one many-to-many, middlegen doesn't bother doing the name mangling, thereby creating two relationships with the same name. This makes xdoclet very angry. Example:
1) A -< B >- C 2) A >- C Relationship names becomes: 1) A-cmp20-C-cmp20 2) A-cmp20-C-cmp20 One workaround seems to be adding a dummy one-to-many relationship with a ditto FK in the child table of the one-to-many, which makes middlegen produce relationship names which are more unique for the one-to-manys, as they are mangled with the foreign key name at the end, thus: 1) A -< B >- C 2) A >- C 3) A >- C (by dummy FK) Relationship names: 1) A-cmp20-C-cmp20 (still unmangled many2many) 2) A-cmp20-C-cmp20-csforeignkeytoa (mangled one2many) 3) A-cmp20-C-cmp20-csdummyforeignkeytoa (mangled one2many) Since relationship names in 1) and 2) above now are different, xdoclet is happy go lucky. However, this adds garbage to the database schema. In addition, the getter naming scheme is somewhat altered, as 'get' <foo> 'By' <bar> is used instead of 'get'<foo>. Gnerally, the getter (and setter) naming scheme does not take the actual roles into account when creating names. (yes, my database is modeled as an ORM model). So if I have two or more relationships between two tables, it is semantically confusing if they have the same name when it comes to EJB getter/setter methods. This fact is taken care of, however, by the getFooByBar naming scheme above, but if my FK is named e.g. aId (which I beleive is a common practice) my getter ends up as getBByAid. Ok. Bad example. From the real world: Solution::getActorByApproveActorId(). Ideally this should have been Solution::getApprovingActor() or something. In essence; it would be nice if it were be possible to specify actual method names, e.g. in the *-prefs.properties file. Any comments? Regards, Kristoffer Moe Senior Consultant Elan It ReSource ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ middlegen-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/middlegen-user
