PaloT wrote:
>
> I commited some new features to SVN:
> - @Name annotation is generated for all method parameters (entity
> constructors, service methods, ...) - necessary for smartclient
> (should we turn it on/off by some property?)
>
Yes, it should be turned off by default. We usually have property flags for
turning on/off individual features, such as:
generate.parameterNameAnnotation=true
Then we have project.nature, which is a higher level setting. In
GeneratorProperties.initDerivedDefaults you should set the generate flags
when hasProjectNature("business-tier") && hasProjectNature("smartclient")
This means that end user normally only has to care of high level project
nature property, but it makes it possible to override defaults at a fine
grained level also.
PaloT wrote:
>
> - You can generate for all auditable entities "full audit log" by
> appending "generate.fullAuditable=true" to
> sculptor-generator.properties, this mean you can see in entity also
> old values through method receiveAuditHandler() which is generated to
> entity
>
Good
PaloT wrote:
>
> - Drools support - you can inject drools support to service tier
> calls, just add "generate.injectDrools=true" to
> sculptor-generator.properties.
>
Good
PaloT wrote:
>
> When I was doing some changes in templates I found that they are using
> mixed <TAB> <SPACES> indentation. Is it intention? I prefer pure <TAB>
> for indentation. I can update this in VIM by !retab command. What's
> your opinion (Patrik or anybody else ;-) )?
>
We use 4 spaces for indentation in java code (no tabs). In templates we have
not cared about this and I think the xpand editor use tab and therefore it
is mostly tabs. In the end it doesn't matter in the templates. Please don't
reformat all templates now. We are working in branch also and we must be
able to easily merge between them.
PaloT wrote:
>
> I also find some strange construct like (L:294 in Spring.xpt):
> «IF isWar() -»
> «EXPAND headerWithMoreNamespaces»
> «ELSE -»
> «EXPAND headerWithMoreNamespaces»
> «ENDIF -»
>
> Should I directly remove them when I see this? When I do this should I
> ask for review (this is best way for me)?
>
This obviously wrong :-). Please remove. Right now we are trying to wrap up
the 1.7.0 release and we should avoid doing too much changes. When that
release is done you are welcome to do refactoring. I will review, especially
now for the 1.7.0 release. You checkin and I review when I synchronize with
svn.
Thanks, Patrik
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/New-features-tp26165006s17564p26191945.html
Sent from the Fornax-Platform mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Fornax-developer mailing list
Fornax-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fornax-developer
