Re: ojb returns empty collections instead of null

[Thomas Mahler]

Hi Tim,

Tim Drury wrote:
When I retrieve an object from the database via OJB which
has a collection of child objects, but there are no child
objects in the database, OJB fills the parent object
collection reference with an empty collection instead of
keeping the collection reference null.
Is there a way to have OJB keep the reference null?  
Not with out a change to the OJB codebase.

Is
there a benefit to having the empty collection as opposed
to a null reference?
1. It's simpler to implement this way.
2. In case you want to add elements to the collection-attribute you 
don't need a null pointer check.

I admit: not very strong reasons. But you are the first to complain 
about this feature in this century ;-)

cheers,
thomas
-tim



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

ojb returns empty collections instead of null

[Tim Drury]

When I retrieve an object from the database via OJB which
has a collection of child objects, but there are no child
objects in the database, OJB fills the parent object
collection reference with an empty collection instead of
keeping the collection reference null.

Is there a way to have OJB keep the reference null?  Is
there a benefit to having the empty collection as opposed
to a null reference?

-tim



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]