Nice !
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Kasper Sørensen <[email protected]> wrote: > I moved now the SimpleTableDefParser into core. That's actually a nice, > separate feature then. I added this story about it also: METAMODEL-41. > > > 2014-03-13 1:01 GMT+01:00 Henry Saputra <[email protected]>: > >> Yeah generic parser should be useful. And it should injectable through >> the Spring context for extension/ override I suppose. >> >> - Henry >> >> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Kasper Sørensen >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > What I mean is that you could easily think of other similar frameworks to >> > Spring, or just other scenarios in general, where it would also be useful >> > to externalize table defs. For instance in DataCleaner we have a >> ridiculous >> > XML format for it which is waaaay verbose. We could basically throw out a >> > few pages of XML in favor or a more concise (although interpreted, so >> less >> > type-safe) String element in our XML files. >> > >> > >> > 2014-03-05 19:19 GMT+01:00 Henry Saputra <[email protected]>: >> > >> >> Sorry for the late reply. >> >> >> >> I don't think we need to generalize the table def parser for now >> >> because the format of the table definition pretty much fixed. >> >> >> >> But like any framework code, anything that could be injected to >> >> override default behavior is always nice. That is why we added Spring >> >> support at the first place =) >> >> >> >> >> >> - Henry >> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Kasper Sørensen >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi all, >> >> > >> >> > For the Spring module I needed a way for the user to provide a >> >> > SimpleTableDef object via an externalizable string. So I ended up >> >> building >> >> > a small parser that would take simple table definitions of this form: >> >> > >> >> > person ( >> >> >> id INTEGER, >> >> >> name VARCHAR, >> >> >> birthdate DATE >> >> >> ); >> >> >> company ( >> >> >> id BIGINT, >> >> >> name VARCHAR, >> >> >> logo BINARY >> >> >> ); >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > The parser is right now put directly in the DataContextFactoryBean, >> but >> >> can >> >> > easily be refactored into a separate parser class... >> >> > >> >> > Do you guys agree that would be a better way forward to make this a >> >> general >> >> > SimpleTableDef parser? I'm thinking that such a parser could have a >> >> general >> >> > purpose and would also benefit in terms of maintenance to be put in >> the >> >> > core module. >> >> > >> >> > Background: SimpleTableDefs are often used in schemaless stores like >> the >> >> > MongoDB, CouchDB or HBase stores. Here it serves as a guide from the >> user >> >> > to model the store. >> >> > >> >> > Best regards, >> >> > Kasper >> >> >>
