Hello everybody,
I have no problems automatically generating value objetcs with xdoclet,
works fine.
BUT now I need some fields to be only exposed via getter methods. The
reason is that the value objetcs are exposed to the user via session
beans, and only the session bean should be allowed to wr
Hello!
I'm looking for a way to keep my VO cache consistent with my beans. I don't
want to invalidate my entire cache when I apply changes to one bean.
XDoclet generates my Value Objects, having relations to other Value Objects.
I'm using lots of bi-directional aggregate relationships, so I need
Hi,
I was just looking for a clarification of the xxxHasBeenSet methods that
are generated for the EJB value objects.
We wanted to perform specific functionality only if a certain field had
been changed after coming back from the web tier, but it seems that this
field will also have the hasBeenSe
Is there a way to have value objects with bidirectional relationships?
I have some problems to interpret the patch talk here:
http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/xdoclet/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?key=XDT-307
thanx!
Marcus
---
This SF.Net email
James,
If you have a bidirectional relationship between two EJBs you cannot
have the same bidirectional relationship between their related value
objects. In case you have this, XDoclet will always call the getXXXValue
method in the related EJB to get the corresponding value object, so you
You can not use target-multiple here because your
relationship is bi-directional. It is only used when
in a uni-directional relationship and the one
multiplicity side is blind. Just remove them and try
to see what will be generated. It's a good habit to
check the generated dd and you can find the p
Hello XDoclet friends.
I am having a problem with CMR and Value Objects. I would like to have
value objects for both sides of the relationship, but it seems when I do
so, I get a "Reentrant method call detected" error in JBoss. Here is
how I have my beans' relationships setup:
UserBean:
/**
Hi,
I'm using xdoclet 1.2b3 to generate value objects to my entity beans,
but I came to a situation that, although interesting, I cannot resolve
regarding fields used as primary keys.
I have a customer entity bean (presented here with only the declarations
needed to describe the problem):
/**
*
Hello,
I am attempting to use XDoclet to generate two Entity Beans and the according value-objects.
The problme is that I only can generate those EJB's with a unidirectional relation otherwise I get a problematic exception:
javax.ejb.TransactionRolledbackLocalException
I do not know what is it al
abstract Integer getId ( ) ;
public abstract void setId ( Integer id ) ;
That should be all you need.
David Harkness
Sony Pictures Digital Networks
(310) 482-4756
-Original Message-
From: Bryce Fischer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 6:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
ECTED] On Behalf Of Harkness, David
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 10:02 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Value Objects (and BMP Entities)
>
> In your case you do not need to specify the pk-class. Instead, include
> the class-level tag "@ejb.bean prim
Trying to generate a ValueObject from a BMP Entity Bean. The PK is a
String, and I've specified @ejb.pk class = "java.lang.String".
When it generates the Value Object, it insists on using the PK as if it
was a custom PK class (pk.setGroupName(groupName)). I've included the
source below with tags.
Did anybody else have this problem? Its really blocking my development right now?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of François Eric
Sent: March 25, 2003 12:05 PM
To: Xdoclet Mailing List (E-mail)
Subject: [Xdoclet-user] Value Objects for one
Hello,
I have recently
switched from data-objects to value-objects (great feature!). I have a
problem though when trying to create a value-object for a one to one CMR
composition. The value-object that is generated is ok but the CMP object
that is generated isn't (in my opinion).
My re
Folks,
I found the error that was preventing the PersonUId from being set in my
value object. I had declared the type to be an int instead of an Integer
in one of my setters, and xdoclet instead of choking just skipped over it.
Thanks for all your help.
Nat
c: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Xdoclet-user] Value Objects : What am I missing ?
No, I'm sorry, scratch that. I'm still having the problem.
My ValueObject does indeed have a getPersonUId and setPersonUId method,
generated by xdoclet.
Bu
my object ("getPersonUId()")
>
> thanx tho
>
> Nat
>
>
> ......
> .From: "Adam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> .To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> .Subject: Re: [Xdoclet-user] Value Objects : What am I missing ?
> .Date: Tue, 4 Mar 20
..
.From: "Adam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
.To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
.Subject: Re: [Xdoclet-user] Value Objects : What am I missing ?
.Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 03:25:45 -0600
.Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
.Did you include a setXXX method for your UID field in the Bean cla
first set out
to create read-only beans.
- Original Message -
From: "Nathaniel Rahav" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 1:28 AM
Subject: [Xdoclet-user] Value Objects : What am I missing ?
hello,
I am encountering a funny situ
hello,
I am encountering a funny situation, I dont know if I am doing something
wrong or if this is how the value object pattern works:
When I call MyBeanLocal.getValueObject() I get a value object with all
the CMP fields populated except my UID field! Therefore I cannot do any
further loo
Saripalli, Raju wrote:
With version 1.2 of xdoclet the tags have changed. Example below:
@ejb:remote --> @ejb.remote
Both are good. We changed notation because Javadoc 1.4 is quite noisy
with custom tags. Anyway, the xjavadoc (the xdoclet's doc parser) can
recognize both @tag:name and @
t; as opposed to "ejb:remote", would XDoclet
still put the information
into
the template ?
Thanks,
Raju
-Original Message-From: Brian McSweeney
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, January 15,
2003 1:09 PMTo: xdocletSubject: [Xdoclet-user] Value
o
Hi,
We're trying to get XDoclet to build slightly
customised value objects without getting into writing our own, and we've got a
bit stuck.
What we have is an entity bean A related using CMR
to another entity bean B. The primary key of B is a URL, so the CMR relationship
uses this URL to
I have found the 'bug'. Didn't look too carefully apparantely.
The abstract value-object getters and setters are implemented in the
generated CMP classes, so when not using the subtask, you
have to provide for the VO getter/setter yourself.
>
> When did you get that error? is it while running t
When did you get that error? is it while running the test cases or in
the web app?
can you send the stack trace please.
On Sat, 2002-12-14 at 17:52, Dylan van Iersel wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> >From the xpetstore examples, I gather that I can have XDoclet generate a
> Value Object and define an ab
; [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dylan van
> Iersel
> Sent: 15. desember 2002 00:07
> To: xdoclet
> Subject: [Xdoclet-user] Value-Objects & CMR: another
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am using XDoclet 1.2b2. The documentation on "dataobject" so far states
&g
I am interested in this same topic and I am using the
task to generate POJO to be used by hibernate. Since it appears that
VO supports relationships b/w other VOs, is it possible that the
task will pick up these same relationships when generating
forms?
Thanks,
Matt
On Saturday, December
Hi all,
I am using XDoclet 1.2b2. The documentation on "dataobject" so far states
"Creates "data objects" for Entity EJBs. This task is currently being
deprecated in favour of Value Object which is more powerful in terms of
relationships (1-1, 1-n and n-m)."
Can somebody explain to me in what wa
Hi all,
>From the xpetstore examples, I gather that I can have XDoclet generate a
Value Object and define an abstract getter/setter to access it.
For example, from ItemEJB:
* @ejb.value-object
* name="Item"
* match="*"
/**
* @ejb.interface-method
* @ejb.transaction
*
Hi Marcus (and everybody else),
thanks for your VO documentation post. I like it, though I think
documentation for both uni- and bidirectional relationships should be
included as well as documentation on one-to-one relationships. Besides, I
believe there are some more attributes you left out proba
02 02:32
> To: Lista XDoclet-User
> Subject: [Xdoclet-user] Value Objects HOWTO
>
>
> Hello, folks.
>
> I've uploaded a small howto about how to use value objects in xdoclet.
> This is always a hot topic in this list, so I hope this doc can help you
> a but.
>
> Be
Hello, folks.
I've uploaded a small howto about how to use value objects in xdoclet.
This is always a hot topic in this list, so I hope this doc can help you
a but.
Bear in mind that this is an early draft. I would be glad to receive any
comments, suggestions, additions, criticism... feel free to
David,
yeah, I see your point.
again I'm not 100% sure, but I think that value objects do (or at least
there's no technical reason why they couldn't) support the requirement you
put for pulling part of the cmr's data.
However, as you obviously prefer having the value object creation done in a
S
Hi,
I agree with Mattias that when an entity bean has been developped, he
should not be touched again to create new value objects. The developers
of the business logic should come, see the entity and create new VO for
their own uses.
But I also agree with Dmitri that, to summarise, "wtf", it i
> no, I did not get *any* feedback - I ain't got *no* feedback. :-)
See below.
> > Now, what's the remedy?
> >
> > Do not generate VOs in the entity bean. The right point for
> > VO generation is
> > the session facade of the component that executes on behalf
> > of the client to
> > support its
Dmitri,
To add my feedback to this, the difference is really in the design. For
small projects, it's fine to have the entity create the value objects.
However, on medium to large projects, the design doesn't scale. This is
because entities are supposed to be "domain objects" - not necessaril
Matthias,
> no, I did not get *any* feedback - I ain't got *no* feedback. :-)
[snip]
> > I just had an interesting discussion on the uml2ejb-user
> > mailing list and
> > thought it might be interesting what the XDoclet people think
> > about this
> > point.
> >
> > Opinions or ideas?
I'm prob
Hi Chris,
no, I did not get *any* feedback - I ain't got *no* feedback. :-)
Cheers...
Matthias
> -Original Message-
> From: Shaw, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 2:10 PM
> To: 'Matthias Bohlen'
> Subject: RE: [Xdoclet
Hi,
I just had an interesting discussion on the uml2ejb-user mailing list and
thought it might be interesting what the XDoclet people think about this
point.
Opinions or ideas?
Matthias
Matthias Bohlen
Consulting that helps project teams to succeed...
Web:
http://www.mbohlen.de/
Snail:
On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 12:14:18PM +0200, Andreas Leitner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am having problems with Value Objects. I have a set of VOs which inherit from
>self-written classes (done via the 'extends' attribute). Now the super class really
>needs to have a chance to initialize itself, but the g
Hi,
I am having problems with Value Objects. I have a set of VOs which inherit from
self-written classes (done via the 'extends' attribute). Now the super class really
needs to have a chance to initialize itself, but the generated value objects do not
call any constructors of the super class (
Ok, I've gone and utterly confused myself here. I believe I understand
the logical differences between those mentioned in the Subject of this
message. My question is, which is best practice to use in xdoclet?
@ejb:value-object looks cool but documentation is sparse.
-ryan
--
Humans are the unfor
JBoss.
Sorry, guys. SORRY, MARIUS.
alex
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Alex Loubyansky
> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 11:24 AM
> To: 'Marius Kotsbak'
> Cc: 'Ingo Bruell'; 'xdocl
> But i wonder why most the time autonumber fields are used as pk. Could
> someone explane (it should be OT but i am interested in)
>
Why not ?
OK that is simple answer
Why would you want to have a complex PK ?
OK also not very fair
The main reason I see is the possibility you have after to chan
ww.theserverside.com, Patterns section rsp. EJB Design Patterns book)
for more info.
cu,
Bernie
-Ursprungliche Nachricht-
Von: Ingo Bruell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Gesendet: Montag, 29. April 2002 10:33
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re[2]: [Xdoclet-user] value-objects wrong PK usage
Hi,
oops, my reply was going directly to Marius.
MK> Alex Loubyansky wrote:
>> What do you mean "complex PKs don't work very well with jboss3.x now"?
>>
MK> http://main.jboss.org/forums/thread.jsp?forum=46&thread=9931
MK> So i stopped using it. I don't know if it is just the table-creating
M
L PROTECTED]
> Cc: 'Ingo Bruell'; 'xdoclet-user'
> Subject: Re: [Xdoclet-user] value-objects wrong PK usage
>
>
> Alex Loubyansky wrote:
>
> > What do you mean "complex PKs don't work very well with
> jboss3.x now"?
> >
> http://main.jbo
I solved the previous problem (didn't find the interfaces/homes when in
javadoc) but i had to make the following modification :
sourcepath="${java.dir};${log4j.path}"
to
sourcepath="${java.dir};${log4j.path};${generated.java.dir}"
and have to run ant two times (at first gives me the same previ
t;
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
>>Marius Kotsbak
>>Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 5:32 PM
>>To: Ingo Bruell
>>Cc: xdoclet-user
>>Subject: Re: [Xdoclet-user] value-objects wrong
I found the error:
in class PkTagsHandler, method pkfieldListFrom is a statement:
"ret = name + "." + attr;"
it should be:
"ret += name + "." + attr;"
Ingo Bruell
---
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Oldenburg PGP-Fingerprint: 9DD0 1776 DF4D 5B16 A532 C2A1 4701 EEA2
Germany PGP-Public-Key available at p
xdoclet-user
> Subject: Re: [Xdoclet-user] value-objects wrong PK usage
>
>
> I have also seen this. Have also reported it as a bug, but I
> don't think
> anyone has commented it.
>
> Another thing to remember is that complex PKs does't work
> very wel
I have also seen this. Have also reported it as a bug, but I don't think
anyone has commented it.
Another thing to remember is that complex PKs does't work very well with
jboss 3.x now, if you use it.
Ingo Bruell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> i am using now value-objects, to get my non persistent attri
Hi,
i am using now value-objects, to get my non persistent attributes into a
"DataObject". Most auf my beans
have komplex Primary Keys, that means that they are composed with two or
more attributes.
In a ValueObject a PrimaryKey is only created withe the last PrimaryKey
attribute and so it could
Em Qua, 2002-04-03 às 17:17, Steve Knight escreveu:
> Also, Vincent or Marcus, do you have any suggestions on what would be the simplest
>way to implement a solution to my earlier problem...excluding a cmr field from
>certain value objects?
Just fixed it. I'm submitting the patch to sourceforg
arcus Brito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lista XDoclet-User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Xdoclet-user] Value Objects & bidirectional relationship
___
Xdoclet-user mailing list
[E
Em Qua, 2002-04-03 às 17:17, Steve Knight escreveu:
> Hey guys,
> I have more thoughts on Value Objects.
> What if I try and use Value Objects and two entities have a bidirectional
>relationship? Me thinks you will get into a circular reference problem, no? Just
>looking at the code I can see
Hey guys,
I have more thoughts on Value Objects.
What if I try and use Value Objects and two
entities have a bidirectional relationship? Me thinks you will get into a
circular reference problem, no? Just looking at the code I can see a few
places where this might happen (the no args constru
57 matches
Mail list logo
