[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: AW: [sdo] SDO 3 API Cleanup - first step
Hi Ron, I'd like to make the core DataObject interface as simple as possible to start with (that's the interface I sent out), and have a discussion about whether any of the rest of the methods are really needed. I'd be happy to add them back, before this exercise is complete, but I think it's important to go through the exercise and really convince ourselves that we need a lot of the methods that I believe are very rarely used. I see SDO3 as an opportunity similar to what happened with EJB3 - simplify! I think the answer to backward compatibility is to make sure the 2.1 and 3.0 interfaces don't conflict, as I mention in the doc file I sent in my previous email. > Can you provide some clarifications why the index accessors are removed? > Is this something that you feel is not used in SDO 2.1? Other than samples, I've never seen anyone use them. > I notice that get(Property) is there, but there is no T get(Property,Class<T>). > Is this intentional? My logic is that they are simply convenience methods (with a significant performance implication). The property methods are really there for performance reasons (otherwise, why not always use the string methods?), so they seem like a contradiction. I'm very open to be convinced otherwise. Can you explain what you mean by using the index methods to "implement some kind of toString method"? Thanks, Frank "Barack, Ron" <ron.barack@sap.com> 03/17/2008 07:52 PM To Frank Budinsky/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, <sdo@lists.oasis-open.org> cc Subject AW: [sdo] SDO 3 API Cleanup - first step Hi Frank, Can you provide some clarifications why the index accessors are removed? Is this something that you feel is not used in SDO 2.1? I notice that get(Property) is there, but there is no <T> T get(Property,Class<T>). Is this intentional? When you are putting in generics, it's bad form to force people to cast. Since we don't yet have a solution for namespaces in XPaths, I'm not so comfortable with removing the Property based interface, and I think the index based interface is useful too, for instance, when implementing some kind of toString() method. Ron ________________________________ Von: Frank Budinsky [mailto:frankb@ca.ibm.com] Gesendet: Mo 17.03.2008 21:28 An: sdo@lists.oasis-open.org Betreff: [sdo] SDO 3 API Cleanup - first step Hi guys, I've taken a pass at defining a new SDO 3 version of DataObject. You may hardly recognize it :-) It's gone down from 119 to 24 methods (one of which is new). The main changes are: 1) move from package commonj.sdo to org.oasis.sdo 2) use Java 5 generics 3) deprecate/remove int-based accessors and a couple of other methods 4) rename some methods to avoid name collisions with SDO 2.1 and static SDOs I've attached the new proposed interface, and a short doc file that includes a table that shows all the changes being proposed. If possible, I would like to spend 20 min or so of tomorrow's call talking about this. Thanks, Frank
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]