Yes, but we would only have one new class implementing "IHqlFunctionProvider" instead of several MyMsSql2008Dialect, MyOracle9iDialect, MyMySQL5Dialect, etc. This is not critical to me, I was just wondering... I really like NHibernate's extensibility, and in HQL extensibility can only be achieved by switching to a new class (xxxDialect) at configuration time.
On Apr 20, 7:28 pm, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: > so and so. > At the end you will have the same work. > Instead configure a different dialect you have to configure a > "IHqlFunctionProvider". > Instead write RegisterFunction in the dialect you have to do it in > "IHqlFunctionProvider". > > The other part of the work (re-usability) is the same because as you can do > today inside each dialect you can re-use same functions implementations. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Ricardo Peres <[email protected]> wrote: > > Something like you showed, but for HQL: the possibility to add custom > > server-specific functions that can be used in HQL, without the need to > > subclass xxxDialect. > > Does it make sense? > > > On Apr 20, 6:34 pm, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > which is your proposal ? > > > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Ricardo Peres <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > Some time ago, Fabio posted about LINQ provider extensibility in > > > > NHibernate: > > > >http://fabiomaulo.blogspot.com/2010/07/nhibernate-linq-provider-exten. > > .. > > > > . > > > > It is such a nice feature that I was wondering if it would make sense > > > > to have something like that for HQL (yes, I still use HQL...). I know > > > > that we can subclass a dialect and add custom functions, but it > > > > requires duplicating code for all possible dialects that we are going > > > > to use. > > > > What are your thoughts? > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > RP > > > > -- > > > Fabio Maulo > > -- > Fabio Maulo
