I love problems like this. Keep 'em coming :D
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Andrew Stewart
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Cheers Paul
> You are a star, once I get my laptop back up and running I'll go about
> applying your first patch, and I'll look into this second patch.
> Thanks
> Andy
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Paul Batum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Andy,
>>
>> This one was pretty straightforward to fix using interfaces. I created
>> an IOneToManyPart interface with Cascade, LazyLoad, and Inverse. I
>> then implemented it explicitly on OneToManyPart delegating where I
>> could to the existing implementation. I then modified the
>> AlterOneToManyMap method on Conventions to accept an IOneToManyPart
>> interface and modified the delegate it calls accordingly. You should
>> now find the 'm' parameter In the original code you supplied is a
>> IOneToManyPart and your desired code will compile.
>>
>> As with your last problem, I've attached the changes in patch format
>> so you can see whats different and figure out where you want to go
>> next.
>>
>> Paul Batum
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Andrew Stewart
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Hi James
>> > If you take this out of the automapping loop, the same applies for
>> > individual mappings. Lets say I want lazy loading on in all my maps but
>> > don't want to specify that over and over again. You can specify it in
>> > the
>> > Visitor.Conventions. and it will apply it when you write your individual
>> > mappings. So for example:
>> > var model = new PersistenceModel();
>> > model.Conventions.OneToManyConvention = o =>
>> > o.SetAttribute("lazy", "true");
>> > model.addMappingsFromAssembly("Load Assembly Here");
>> > model.Configure(cfg);
>> > That will work at the moment. Automap just sits on top of the normal
>> > code.
>> > To better phrase my question, I was just wondering if anyone had any
>> > idea's
>> > on a good way to handle conventions, as at the moment I'm struggling.
>> > Cheers
>> > Andy
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 11:35 AM, James Gregory
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Off the top of my head, I don't think we can de-generic those classes.
>> >> We
>> >> need the generic type definitions to create the Expression<T>
>> >> parameters.
>> >> I'm so out of the loop, but couldn't you have it where the onetomany
>> >> convention gets registered into a list that all onetomany's use when
>> >> writing
>> >> their output, rather than just ones for that exact type?
>> >> I need to spend some time getting my head around what you've been doing
>> >> with this automapping/conventions stuff.
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Andrew Stewart
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi
>> >>> I'm just looking over our convention logic. What I'd like to be able
>> >>> to
>> >>> do is specify that certain things happen in all my maps, at the moment
>> >>> I
>> >>> have the following working:
>> >>> AutoPersistenceModel
>> >>> .MapEntitiesFromAssemblyOf<Company>()
>> >>> .Where( t => (t.Namespace.Contains("NamespaceName")
>> >>> .ForTypesThatDeriveFrom<Task>( map => map.HasManyToMany<User>( t =>
>> >>> t.Users ) )
>> >>> .ForTypesThatDeriveFrom<Plot>( map => map.HasManyToMany<Service>( t
>> >>> =>
>> >>> t.Services ) )
>> >>> .WithConvention( c => c.OneToManyConvention = m =>
>> >>> {
>> >>>
>> >>> m.SetAttribute("cascade", "all");
>> >>>
>> >>> m.SetAttribute("lazy", "true");
>> >>> })
>> >>> .Configure( configuration );
>> >>> As you can see the bit in bold isn't nice at all. But it does work.
>> >>> What
>> >>> I'd like to achieve and I'm sure the syntax could be improved slightly
>> >>> is
>> >>> something more like the below:
>> >>> AutoPersistenceModel
>> >>> .MapEntitiesFromAssemblyOf<Company>()
>> >>> .Where( t => (t.Namespace.Contains("NamespaceName")
>> >>> .ForTypesThatDeriveFrom<Task>( map => map.HasManyToMany<User>( t =>
>> >>> t.Users ) )
>> >>> .ForTypesThatDeriveFrom<Plot>( map => map.HasManyToMany<Service>( t
>> >>> =>
>> >>> t.Services ) )
>> >>> .WithConvention( c => c.OneToManyConvention = m =>
>> >>> {
>> >>>
>> >>> m.Cascade.All();
>> >>>
>> >>> m.LazyLoad();
>> >>> })
>> >>> .Configure( configuration );
>> >>> Now here's my problem at the moment Generic Types.
>> >>> Essentially the OneToMany is generic and I want to apply these to all
>> >>> different types of entity maps, has anyone got a good idea on how to
>> >>> make
>> >>> these none generic-able?
>> >>> Maybe someone has some preset idea's on how this should be implemented
>> >>> who can just overirde this entire conversation, and I'll just head
>> >>> down that
>> >>> route instead.
>> >>> Cheers
>> >>> Andy
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > =================
>> > I-nnovate Software - Bespoke Software Development, uk wirral.
>> > http://www.i-nnovate.net
>> >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> =================
> I-nnovate Software - Bespoke Software Development, uk wirral.
> http://www.i-nnovate.net
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Fluent NHibernate" group.
To post to this group, send email to fluent-nhibernate@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/fluent-nhibernate?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
