Re: Re: or and combine missing
<anthony <at> berglas.org>
2010-12-15 00:43:26 GMT
The work around for this is to use a raw SQL clause. If the requirement is relatively rare, then this is a good
trade off between convenience and keeping SimpleOrm simple.
So you can still use SimpleORM to manage the objects.
Anthony
At 04:41 PM 14/12/2010, you wrote:
>
>
>Hello Anthony,
>
>I am migrating some older projects to SimpleORM 3.x on demand and did
>notice that some methods are missing.
>The things i do are not complicated, just 'where a=1 and b=1 or a=2 and
>c=1' but not solvable by the .in method.
>So i do not really need the .combine but the .or method.
>I know it is a community-process and if i really like to have some
>functionality i have to contribute. As i am only using the framework as
>a user i do not know much on the internas and my learning-curve is
>rather steep at the moment.
>
>Ciao, Guenter
>
>============================
>
>Hello Guenter,
>
>There is a bit of an issue in that they were rather ugly. But so are the
>alternatives.
>
>A cleaner way would be something like
>
>new SQuery().AddOr(SQuery.eq(...), SQuery.eq(...))...
>
>with the tree being built up explicitly rather than with the
>.combine/.combineEnd push/pop methods.
>
>However, note that SQuery.eq would need to be a static method, with no
>access to the actual query being built until the top level AddOr, which
>would hten have to validate it.
>
>I just thought that as queries became that complex, maybe we should
>defer to SQL clauses, and keep SimpleOrm simple.
>
>(One thing that might be useful is a specific isEmpty test for (? = ''
>OR ? IS NULL). Likewise a fieldNullEq for (? = ? OR (? IS NULL AND ? IS
>NULL), and fieldEmptyEq ...).
>
>To me, a bigger challenge, and the one that is very database dependent,
>is some function processing with dates and sub-strings for more complex
>queries. That certainly would be a mess with the push/pop approach.
>
>What is your use case, and does it really justify an additions? Would
>you be prepared to suggest a properly thought out syntax, provide
>examples and test cases, and possibly offer an implementation? (Not
>hard, but needs doing.)
>
>Regards,
>
>Anthony
>
Dr Anthony Berglas, anthony <at> berglas.org Mobile: +61 4 4838 8874
Just because it is possible to push twigs along the ground with ones nose
does not necessarily mean that is the best way to collect firewood.
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SimpleORM/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SimpleORM/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
SimpleORM-digest <at> yahoogroups.com
SimpleORM-fullfeatured <at> yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
SimpleORM-unsubscribe <at> yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
By combine, do you mean UNION ?
> What is the
> best practice to use if the condition can not be created whith the
> methods available?
You can use the rawPredicate method, or even the rawSql...
Franck
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
RSS Feed