FAQ
In Sun's released J2EE6 there are introduced several improvings of JPQL,
analogue of our EJBQL [1]. Some features, like CASE expressions, look
exciting. Just curious, does anyone have a plan to improve EJBQL to supoort
that?

[1]
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/JavaEE/JavaEE6Overview_Part3.html
--
Andrey

Search Discussions

  • Andrus Adamchik at Dec 14, 2009 at 3:42 pm
    Yes, we probably should, as well as finishing EJB3.0 missing pieces
    like support for constructors and OUTER joins (IIRC these are the 2
    things not working in Cayenne 3.0 EJBQL)...

    Also probably should rename it to CQL (Cayenne Query Language) to
    avoid wrong associations and allow us to add our own extensions (e.g.
    add support for DB expressions).

    Andrus
    On Dec 14, 2009, at 9:03 AM, Andrey Razumovsky wrote:

    In Sun's released J2EE6 there are introduced several improvings of
    JPQL,
    analogue of our EJBQL [1]. Some features, like CASE expressions, look
    exciting. Just curious, does anyone have a plan to improve EJBQL to
    supoort
    that?

    [1]
    http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/JavaEE/JavaEE6Overview_Part3.html
    --
    Andrey
  • Aristedes Maniatis at Dec 14, 2009 at 11:18 pm

    On 15/12/09 2:42 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    Yes, we probably should, as well as finishing EJB3.0 missing pieces like
    support for constructors and OUTER joins (IIRC these are the 2 things
    not working in Cayenne 3.0 EJBQL)...

    Also probably should rename it to CQL (Cayenne Query Language) to avoid
    wrong associations and allow us to add our own extensions (e.g. add
    support for DB expressions).
    If we are going to rename it, we should do it now, before the release and before people start relying on the naming we've just introduced with 3.0.

    But I think it is OK to leave it as EJBQL since it will help convince people moving from some other tool where they have created lots of queries they don't want to have to rewrite. A bit like HTML, it is mostly the same, most of the time. Except when it isn't because we do extra bits.


    Ari

    --

    -------------------------->
    Aristedes Maniatis
    GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A
  • Andrus Adamchik at Dec 15, 2009 at 12:24 am
    Too late to change anything in 3.0...

    As for EJBQL, the term may not be familiar to many users. I am
    actually a bit confused myself. All the JPA literature talks of JPQL,
    and only the spec talks of EJBQL. We picked the worst term of the 2
    IMO :)

    Andrus

    On Dec 14, 2009, at 6:17 PM, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
    On 15/12/09 2:42 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
    Yes, we probably should, as well as finishing EJB3.0 missing pieces
    like
    support for constructors and OUTER joins (IIRC these are the 2 things
    not working in Cayenne 3.0 EJBQL)...

    Also probably should rename it to CQL (Cayenne Query Language) to
    avoid
    wrong associations and allow us to add our own extensions (e.g. add
    support for DB expressions).
    If we are going to rename it, we should do it now, before the
    release and before people start relying on the naming we've just
    introduced with 3.0.

    But I think it is OK to leave it as EJBQL since it will help
    convince people moving from some other tool where they have created
    lots of queries they don't want to have to rewrite. A bit like HTML,
    it is mostly the same, most of the time. Except when it isn't
    because we do extra bits.


    Ari

    --

    -------------------------->
    Aristedes Maniatis
    GPG fingerprint CBFB 84B4 738D 4E87 5E5C 5EFA EF6A 7D2E 3E49 102A

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupdev @
categoriescayenne
postedDec 14, '09 at 2:03p
activeDec 15, '09 at 12:24a
posts4
users3
websitecayenne.apache.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase