Hi Craig, I have added block comments to the latest OPENJPA-313.r564688.patch (dated 8/13). I have no authority to delete my previously attached patches.
Catalina On 8/13/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Catalina, > > On Aug 13, 2007, at 6:20 PM, catalina wei wrote: > > > The method I am changing is a private method, so no javadoc is > > required. > > I'm not sure what this statement means. Javadoc is not solely for the > purpose of documenting public methods. It's a way of helping > developers who in future will have to look at the code and try to > figure out if the behavior they're seeing is correct or not in context. > > I'd really like to see the comments below incorporated into the code. > Whether it's in javadoc or comments contained in the body of the > method is a matter of style, but let's make it easier for future > developers. > > Regards, > > Craig > > > > subs flag indicates whether a relation is non-polymorphic relation > > or not. > > In this test scenario, we are dealing with a polymorphic relation, > > so the > > type should be determined by the discriminator value. > > > > The discriminator value can be null in the database because this > > column is > > nullable (our mapping tool does not enforce it as 'not null' > > column, so it > > is possible that other non-jpa application insert a row with null > > discriminator value ). We do not want a null discriminator value > > end up with > > an Exception. So the empty catch block is simply ignore > > potential data related error in fetching the discriminator value. > > Essentially, if the discriminator is not present, we want the type > > initially > > set in oid to be used > > (which is the ClassMapping cls passed in to the getObjectId method). > > Otherwise set the correct type in the oid based on the > > discriminator value. > > > > Catalina > > Craig Russell > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo > 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > > >
