Thanks for taking the time to write this up. I did do the globalTableReferences thing. It at least eliminates the annoyance I was feeling whenever I wrote some JOOQ code - I *knew* I was using thing inconsistently but I didn't want to setup a static analysis tool. I didn't really care which one was used (though it was confusing and annoying at first when figuring out that it didn't matter).
When I tried to do the globalObjectReferences instead, I ran into a problem with Sequences - the global object ref is the *only* specific code reference JOOQ generates. One thing I did do in my own project structure was to factor out the JOOQ generated code to its own Gradle sub-project that my server depends on. This helps me quickly filter out all the JOOQ internal references when I'm scanning the results in my IDE. I have "pojos=false", so now I do searches by looking for: - Table.EXAMPLE - Example() ctor - ExampleRecord This works well enough for me. Thanks for your help. On Monday, October 16, 2017 at 5:03:53 PM UTC+10, [email protected] wrote: > > Sometimes, I just want to answer the question "where do I use this table"? > > I'd like to be able to go to the place where that table is defined and do > a "show usages". > But my IDE (IntelliJ) will only find the references to the specific kind > of reference I'm using, JOOQ declares these "table references" in multiple > places. > > That I know of, there are at least three ways table (or views, etc.) > references are declared in JOOQ. > > 1) use the static constant in Tables class - > table = example.db.Tables.ACCOUNT > > > 2) static constant in the concrete TableImpl subclass - > table = example.db.tables.Account > > > 3) instantiate the concrete subclass - > table = new Account() > > When I do "find usages" in IntelliJ, it only finds references to the one > specific way that my cursor happens to be on. > > Does anyone know of a way where I can ask my IDE "what are all the places > the account table is used in the codebase". > I'm looking for a fast / easy way here that I can do this rapidly, many > times on all sorts of different objects - "grepping" or other text based > scripting is really not what I want. > > Failing an IDE way (which I think might not exist) - is there a JOOQ > feature that can help with this? > > For example, can I tell JOOQ not to generate the static constants, such > that using the Account constructor is the only way to refer to the table? > It would be less convenient - but that's fine, being able to easily know > all places in the code that refer to a table would be worth that price to > me. > Failing existince of a JOOQ feature to help with this, it wouldn't be too > hard for me to remove the features during the code generation stage - but > would that even do the job though? Are the above three "reference types" > the only code-based ways to refer to DB objects, or other there other ways > I don't know about yet? > > ---- > > Yes, I understand this won't help me with views/functions, etc. that are > textually defined to use tables etc. > I'm aware I could put in place some kind of static analysis to enforce > usage of a single type of table reference. But I'm asking if I can use > JOOQ to eliminate the possibility of using different types. > > I am using JOOQ 3.9.3 and Postgres. > My config settings are: > > relations("true") > records("true") > fluentSetters("true") > deprecated("false") > pojos("false") > immutablePojos("false") > pojosEqualsAndHashCode("true") > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
