i've just started using the castormapping subtask, but i have a few questions and suggestions.
-why are the @castor:field tags associated with methods and not the actual fields in the java class? is it possible to have them associated with the fields instead? reason being, when i first started using the tag, it was unclear whether the castor:field tag should be put before the getField() method or the setField() method. seems like associating the tag with the field might be easier...? -is anyone working on a template to generate the create_tables.sql (and drop_tables.sql)? -related to the above suggestion/question of associating @castor:field tags with the java class' fields, is anyone working on a template/mechanism whereby another key=value could be added to the @castor:field tag like "createGetter=no" (default would be "yes") and "createSetter=no" (again, default would be "yes"), so that in one's original .java file, one would really only have to specify the class name, the fields (and its associated @castor:field tags), and any necessary *business* methods? in other words, eliminate the need for writing the setters and getters altogether, and then have the subtask automatically generate new .java files with the automatically-generated (default) setters and getters... thank you. ------------------------------------------------------- Sponsored by: ThinkGeek at http://www.ThinkGeek.com/ _______________________________________________ Xdoclet-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-user
