Hi Tobias.
I am a newbie too, Hence wait for more solid support. Nevertheless I
made some investigate on how to describe a complex object model using
Mapper.
The short answer is that Mapper does not support inheritance and hence
you cannot specilized the ToDo class. Period.
Moreover in some
I have been surprised looking at how Mapper and Record frameworks use
object of anonymous classes extending (Mapped)Field to represent
attributes. This provide a powerful mechanisms to incorporate in Field
traits and classes, services for persistency and representation. Based
on this I am trying
In my comprehension of the overall framework, Mapper provides
persistence together with form management for ui construction and some
serialization method to support the development of REST services.
In the design of Record, persistency has been stripped away in order
to create the condition to
(or multiple child
nodes) of a node.
I am looking at the recent extension to Mapper for inspiration.
Regards
Giuseppe
On 29 Lug, 10:06, marius d. marius.dan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 29, 10:44 am, Giuseppe Fogliazza g.foglia...@mcmspa.it wrote:
In my comprehension of the overall framework, Mapper
Dear Pravin.
Your requests address very basic behaviour of the framework, and you
should not experience any problem in adapting examples from the
aforementioned book.
Even simpler you could follow the Todo example in Getting Started with
Lift accessible from liftweb site (http://liftweb.net/docs/
Hi Pravin,
I'm sorry but I have no experience with MS SQL. By any chance does it
change something if you modify the name of your MappedField from id
to empId ?
Regards
Giuseppe
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
To my understanding, KeyedRecord as well as KeyedField should provide
the basis to implement relationship between model objects.
If in my model object I have a relationship with another model object
this will required the referred class to be at least a KeyedRecord.
Such ReferenceField similar to
I confirm that there are some efforts in progress. Particularly I am
writing a jsr 170 (jackrabbit) backend for Record. It is taking longer
than expected because I am extending Record with reference field and
multivalued field that are of paramount relevance in domain modeling.
I studied recent
On 17/08/2009 15:44, Giuseppe Fogliazza g.foglia...@mcmspa.it wrote:
I confirm that there are some efforts in progress. Particularly I am
writing a jsr 170 (jackrabbit) backend for Record. It is taking longer
than expected because I am extending Record with reference field and
multivalued
Unfortunately you cannot escape from asInstanceOf . Forcing
self:MapperType the type of this will be TimeStamp with MapperType
violating the constraint for the type of the first parameter of
MappedDateTime :T : Mapper[T].
Regards
Giuseppe
On 3 Set, 07:08, Naftoli Gugenheim naftoli...@gmail.com
As an alternative to asInstanceOf you could use explicit type
parameter in MappedField creation:
self:MapperType =
object xdatetime extends MappedDateTime[MapperType](this)
On 3 Set, 09:19, Giuseppe Fogliazza g.foglia...@mcmspa.it wrote:
Unfortunately you cannot escape from asInstanceOf
}
Thanks jon I have improved model in my application with this approach.
Giuseppe
On 3 Set, 16:16, Giuseppe Fogliazza g.foglia...@mcmspa.it wrote:
As an alternative to asInstanceOf you could use explicit type
parameter in MappedField creation:
self:MapperType =
object xdatetime extends
12 matches
Mail list logo
