Hi Eric, Pardon me for asking some perhaps trivial questions.
Eric Dobbs wrote: > On Thursday, April 25, 2002, at 05:42 PM, Sam Joseph wrote: > >> Is there some simple summary somewhere of what else you think is >> wrong with Criteria and why it needs replacing? > > I don't think there's a good summary but here's > a few off the top of my head: > > 1. wish it didn't extend hashtable, > would prefer 'has-a' instead of 'is-a' why? > 2. wish it wasn't implemented as a hashtable at all, > the use of column names for keys means > "FOO >= 10 AND FOO < 20" must use a Criterion. presumably this is only bad because you don't like Criterion > 3. Criterion is ugly, and I wish client code didn't even know > about it. Ugliness is in the eye of the beholder :-) > 4. as you have pointed out, queries of modest complexity using > nested Criterion have precedence problems (which is why I'm > interested in your patch). This seems to be the only substantial problem no? I mean points 1-3 are personal preference (at least superficially). As long as the appropriate functionality is supported I don't think most users will care one way or the other. Is there a specific functional or maintenance reason why, if Criterion was fixed regarding precedence issues, that we would still want to replace Criteria/Criterion? CHEERS> SAM -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
