Hello,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Mahler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> We wanted to keep things simple, thus we also don't have a feature to
> specify factory classes and methods to construct domain objects.
>
> Let's have a little vote
> Do we need support for
> a) private no argument constructors?
> b) userdefined factories to build domain objects?
Maybe you consider this a weird idea, but there is
another possibility:
Classes may be configured to be instantiated by OJB
using a constructor with a particular signature, say
<init>(OjbTagClass)
OjbTagClass has no public/protected constructor,
so the application code cannot call that constructor.
This could be useful if the application developer wishes
that OJB instantiates domain objects differently than
the application (say, without assigning default values
to persistent fields). Besides, no reflection magic
is necessary.
Maybe too weird an idea ...
Personally, I do not consider this issue too important,
so I can live without any modification.
In JDO, however, (a) is required, but it is a different
thing because of the enhancer.
Oliver
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
