persistence@glassfish.java.net

Re: field of type List<String>

From: jeff <jeffrey.blattman_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 09:28:54 -0800 (PST)

hi sanjeeb,

> Collection-valued persistent fields and properties must be defined in
> terms of one of the following collection-valued interfaces

and

> For collection-valued persistent properties, type T must be one of
> these collection interface types in the method signatures above.

what is the definition of a "collection-valued persistent property"?

the spec is telling me that i can only use those 4 listed interfaces ... if it doesn't mean i can (must?) define persistent fields in terms of these interfaces, what does it mean?

the other part is that i find it hard to believe that JP will force me to break one of the most basic tenants of java programming, which is: code to interfaces. are you saying that i must code all my javabean interfaces to concrete classes, and that i cannot use the collection interface types at all?

Sanjeeb Kumar Sahoo <Sanjeeb.Sahoo_at_Sun.COM> wrote: jeff wrote:
> sanjeeb, from page 19 of the jsr 220 persistence spec,
>
> Collection-valued persistent fields and properties must be defined in
> terms of one of the following collection-valued interfaces regardless
> of whether the entity class otherwise adheres to the JavaBeans method
> conventions noted above and whether field or property-based access is
> used:
>
> java.util.Collection, java.util.Set, java.util.List[4], java.util.Map.[5]
>
> For collection-valued persistent properties, type T must be one of
> these collection interface types in the method signatures above.
> Generic variants of these collection types may also be used (for
> example, Set).
>
My understanding of the spec has been that the above section talks about
collection-values relationship fields/properties.

Thanks,
Sahoo


 
---------------------------------
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.