| Chris Beams (JIRA) 2007-10-18, 1:11 am |
|
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/brow...action_12535839 ]
Chris Beams commented on JDO-538:
---------------------------------
+1 for the patch, with a couple comments / questions:
1) @deprecated - if this were Java5 only, I'd use the @Deprecated annotation vs the @deprecated javadoc tag. That said, the javadoc route does work across all versions, so makes sense to use here.
2) in the jdo-signatures text file there are lines like the following:
- public Object executeWithArray(Object[] parameters);
+ public varargs Object executeWithArray(Object[] parameters);
Would you explain this? I'm not sure what the purpose of the signatures file is, but there's no keyword 'varargs' in Java, so I must be missing something.
Thanks.
> Make more JDO APIs generic
> --------------------------
>
> Key: JDO-538
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-538
> Project: JDO
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: api2
> Affects Versions: JDO 2 final
> Reporter: Chris Beams
> Assignee: Craig Russell
> Fix For: JDO 2 maintenance release 1
>
> Attachments: jdo-538.patch
>
>
> Several suggestions relating to evolving the API in support of Java5 features:
> 11.6, "Optional Feature Support":
> The current draft specifies the signature
> Collection supportedOptions();
> then continues to read
> "This method returns a Collection of String [...]"
> This suggests that the signature should be
> Collection<String> supportedOptions();
> 14.6.1, "Query Execution"
> I suggest we eliminate
> Object execute(Object p1);
> Object execute(Object p1, Object p2);
> Object execute(Object p1, Object p2, Object p3);
> and deprecate
> Object executeWithArray(Object[] parameters);
> in favor of a newly added
> Object execute(Object... parameters);
> This new method would seamlessly support any existing calls to the three eliminated methods, and is a proper replacement for executeWithArray().
> This would would leave us with three (non-deprecated) execution methods off the Query interface:
> Object execute();
> Object execute(Object... parameters);
> Object executeWithMap(Map parameters);
> A slightly more radical approach to this evolution would have us also eliminate
> Object execute();
> because the new varargs method can by definition support calls without arguments,
> and deprecate
> Object executeWithMap(Map params);
> in favor of a new
> Object execute(Map params);
> because Java can disambiguate between calls to execute(Object... params) and execute(Map params) just fine. This is predecated by the assumption that it would never be valid to pass a Map instance as a first-class query parameter. That might be a faul
ty assumption, it might also just be confusing.
> If all these changes were made, we'd be left with an execution API consisting of just two methods:
> Object execute(Object... params);
> Object execute(Map params);
> This is, I believe, technically favorable and cleaner, but technical considerations are not the only valid ones. Leaving the no-arg execute() might be friendly to folks that don't understand varargs, etc.
> 14.8, "Deletion by Query":
> The rationale used above for paring down Query's execute methods could also be applied to Query's deletePersistentAll methods. It would be legal and Java5-ish to eliminate the no-arg deletePersistentAll method and reduce the API down to:
> long deletePersistentAll(Object... params);
> long deletePersistentAll(Map params);
> ...
> There's a number of other places in the spec changes like the ones mentioned here could be made, but I might be getting ahead of myself :-) I'll await comments before touching on anything else.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
|