To me, it's about readability. I think there's an example in the
documentation to this point...
Clinton
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Rick R wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Jeff Butler wrote:
>
>> In my case, it's a bit less code:
>>
>> Mapper interface:
>> List getByCompoundK
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Jeff Butler wrote:
> In my case, it's a bit less code:
>
> Mapper interface:
> List getByCompoundKey(@Param("id1") Integer id1,
> @Param("id2") Integer id2);
>
Ah I see. That's an excellent point! I hadn't thought of that. In our case
99% of the parms will be c
In my case, it's a bit less code:
Mapper interface:
List getByCompoundKey(@Param("id1") Integer id1,
@Param("id2") Integer id2);
versus
Method in some class:
@SupressWarnings("unchecked")
List getByCompoundKey(Integer id2, Integer id2) {
Map parms = new HashMap();
parms.put("id1", id1);
pa
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Jeff Butler wrote:
> Using a mapper interface means you have a bit less code to write
>
How is it less code?, that's my whole point in dropping it since I think it
adds more code (for in our case seemingly little gain.) All my sql is in xml
and for every mapper x
Using a mapper interface means you have a bit less code to write and
generics support comes for free without having to do the
@SuppressWarnings annotation. Refactoring support is limited because
the mapper interface name and method names must match the XML - so
simply changing something in the map
This probably has been brought up before, but a quick search on nabble
didn't return anything that useful at the moment...
Our plan is to have ALL sql in the mapper xml files (not annotations.) It
'seems' like the only real benefit we'd then get out of also providing a
corresponding mapper object
Hi there,
thank you very much for your reply.
How
would you expect the period to be passed to the java.util.Date class?The query
uses the "period" column just to group the resulting records; I really only
care about the "expense_date" column (which gets mapped properly to
java.util.Date, as I
I am using version 2.3.4.726 and I believe it's the latest version (apart
from 3.x versions). Should it be fixed in this version or did you mean 3.x
versions?
Thanks,
Tom
On 15.2.2010 14:53, Clinton Begin wrote:
> I believe this was a big and was fixed... What version are you using?
>
> 2010/2/15
I've learned the hard way not to make projections as to when something
will be completed :)
I need to make some updates to the Ibator documentation, and then go
through the arduous release process - not too fun. I'm also using
Ibator and iBATIS3 on a new project, so I have added a few new
feature
