Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Clarify semantics of BindableType #106

Closed
lukasj opened this issue Apr 1, 2015 · 5 comments · Fixed by #468
Closed

Clarify semantics of BindableType #106

lukasj opened this issue Apr 1, 2015 · 5 comments · Fixed by #468
Labels
Priority: Major Type: Improvement

Comments

@lukasj
Copy link
Contributor

lukasj commented Apr 1, 2015

BindableType has three values SINGULAR_ATTRIBUTE, PLURAL_ATTRIBUTE, ENTITY_TYPE.

For an entity like this:

class User {

  private User manager;
}

The lookup of the bindable type for the manager property returns ENTITY_TYPE on Hibernate and SINGULAR_ATTRIBUTE on EclipseLink. I'd argue the latter is wrong as the existence of ENTITY_TYPE indicates that it should be preferred over SINGULAR_ATTRIBUTE if the attribute indeed is a JPA entity. The spec however is completely silent on this and doesn't define any strict rules.
@lukasj
Copy link
Contributor Author

lukasj commented Apr 1, 2015

@glassfishrobot Commented
Reported by oliver.gierke

@lukasj
Copy link
Contributor Author

lukasj commented May 5, 2017

@glassfishrobot Commented
This issue was imported from java.net JIRA JPA_SPEC-106

@lukasj
Copy link
Contributor Author

lukasj commented Aug 31, 2018

@m-reza-rahman
Copy link

This seems like low-hanging fruit that could be looked at in the next release and resolved one way or the other? It does appear to be a fairly low priority either way.

Reza Rahman
Jakarta EE Ambassador, Author, Blogger, Speaker

Please note views expressed here are my own as an individual community member and do not reflect the views of my employer.

gavinking added a commit to gavinking/persistence that referenced this issue Aug 15, 2023
@gavinking
clarify the semantics of Bindable.ENTITY_TYPE via javadoc
96b5613 
see jakartaee#106
@gavinking gavinking mentioned this issue Aug 15, 2023
Merged
@gavinking
Copy link
Contributor

So, okay, this was indeed very slightly ambiguous, though I note that Hibernate already fixed the indicated inconsistency, probably long ago. Anyway, I've "fixed" this issue in #468 by adding some @see annotations to the Javadoc.

@lukasj lukasj linked a pull request Aug 21, 2023 that will close this issue
clarify the semantics of Bindable.ENTITY_TYPE via javadoc #468
Merged
lukasj pushed a commit that referenced this issue Aug 21, 2023
@gavinking @lukasj
clarify the semantics of Bindable.ENTITY_TYPE via javadoc
16b8a64 
see #106
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Priority: Major Type: Improvement
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

106 gavinking/persistence
clarify the semantics of Bindable.ENTITY_TYPE via javadoc gavinking/persistence
3 participants
@gavinking @lukasj @m-reza-rahman