|
Home > Archive > Apache JDO Project > June 2005 > Question about JIRA JDO 54
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Question about JIRA JDO 54
|
|
| Michael Watzek 2005-06-15, 5:45 pm |
| Hi Craig, Michelle
JIRA JDO-54 requests that "in order to test metadata for interfaces, we
need to complete the Company model interfaces that was begun with
ICompany.java. All company classes should implement a corresponding
interface."
If we want the getter/setter methods to return/take interface types,
then we would also have to use interface types for the types of fields,
e.g.
public class Company
implements Serializable, Comparable, DeepEquality, ICompany {
....
private IAddress address;
....
public IAddress getAddress() {
return address;
}
....
public void setAddress(IAddress address) {
this.address = address;
}
....
}
In this case the metadata of JDO and ORM would also have to be adapted,
right?
Regards,
Michael
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Watzek Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
mailto:mwa.tech@spree.de Buelowstr. 66
Tel.: ++49/30/235 520 36 10783 Berlin - Germany
Fax.: ++49/30/217 520 12 http://www.spree.de/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Michelle Caisse 2005-06-17, 2:45 am |
| Hi, Michael,
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't think it is necessary to change
the classes, other than to make them implement an interface. They don't
need to take or return the interface types. The Address getter in
ICompany.java returns Address, for example.
-- Michelle
Michael Watzek wrote:
> Hi Craig, Michelle
>
> JIRA JDO-54 requests that "in order to test metadata for interfaces,
> we need to complete the Company model interfaces that was begun with
> ICompany.java. All company classes should implement a corresponding
> interface."
>
> If we want the getter/setter methods to return/take interface types,
> then we would also have to use interface types for the types of
> fields, e.g.
>
> public class Company
> implements Serializable, Comparable, DeepEquality, ICompany {
> ...
> private IAddress address;
> ...
> public IAddress getAddress() {
> return address;
> }
> ...
> public void setAddress(IAddress address) {
> this.address = address;
> }
> ...
> }
>
> In this case the metadata of JDO and ORM would also have to be
> adapted, right?
>
> Regards,
> Michael
|
|
|
|
|