object relational database versus "inteligent" serialization
in [Java Programming]
|
From: luc peuvrier on 8 Feb 2010 02:27 On 7 fév, 23:01, Arne Vajhøj <a...(a)vajhoej.dk> wrote: > On 07-02-2010 05:37, luc peuvrier wrote: > > > what do you think of > >http://joafip.sourceforge.net/database/dbvsjoafip.html > > I think the author is spamming to much in this group .... > > Arne As you want. But take a look to exiting exchanges with Lew, But so much interesting topics for the persistence and databases Luc
From: Pitch on 8 Feb 2010 04:45 In article <hkmrjo$9lg$1(a)news.albasani.net>, lew(a)lewscanon.com says... > Your "item entity" example has a > constructor that calls 'super()' although the type descends directly > from 'Object' and 'super()' is called regardless. There's nothing wrong with that. In future someone could change the extended class and need not worry about the constructors. -- stirr your cofee properly
From: Arved Sandstrom on 8 Feb 2010 05:31 luc peuvrier wrote: > On 7 f�v, 23:01, Arne Vajh�j <a...(a)vajhoej.dk> wrote: >> On 07-02-2010 05:37, luc peuvrier wrote: >> >>> what do you think of >>> http://joafip.sourceforge.net/database/dbvsjoafip.html >> I think the author is spamming to much in this group .... >> >> Arne > > As you want. > But take a look to exiting exchanges with Lew, > But so much interesting topics for the persistence and databases > Luc Let me ask what I believe is a relevant question, Luc: have you used either Hibernate or Toplink Essentials/EclipseLink, with JPA 1.0, to any reasonable extent? By "reasonable" I mean a non-trivial application that requires a broad mix of persistence design decisions. I think you can see why I ask the question. If you haven't used JPA with either, isn't writing something new a misguided labour? If you have used either or both persistence providers, why exactly were they so deficient? I'm curious. Or what about iBatis, which I'm personally quite fond of? Point being, and this is just my opinion, you shouldn't waste your time solving nonexistent problems. And you wouldn't be the first person announcing new persistence frameworks on this NG...to me it seems like you guys would be performing a greater service to the community by tackling real problems. :-) AHS
From: Lew on 8 Feb 2010 10:54 Pitch wrote: > In article <hkmrjo$9lg$1(a)news.albasani.net>, lew(a)lewscanon.com says... >> Your "item entity" example has a >> constructor that calls 'super()' although the type descends directly >> from 'Object' and 'super()' is called regardless. > > There's nothing wrong with that. In future someone could change the > extended class and need not worry about the constructors. As they could without explicitly calling 'super()'. What's your point? -- Lew
From: Pitch on 8 Feb 2010 12:04
In article <hkpc4a$oe1$2(a)news.albasani.net>, noone(a)lewscanon.com says... > > Pitch wrote: > > In article <hkmrjo$9lg$1(a)news.albasani.net>, lew(a)lewscanon.com says... > >> Your "item entity" example has a > >> constructor that calls 'super()' although the type descends directly > >> from 'Object' and 'super()' is called regardless. > > > > There's nothing wrong with that. In future someone could change the > > extended class and need not worry about the constructors. > > As they could without explicitly calling 'super()'. What's your point? They may forget to call super() -- stirr your cofee properly |