-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.7k
HHH-19383 improvements #10198
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.
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
Merged
Merged
HHH-19383 improvements #10198
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wasn't I doing just that in my original code?
I don't quite understand why you would instead iterate all constructors, if clearly only exactly one with the right amt. of params is allowed ... ?
I removed the constructor iteration I originally also had when I saw there should only be one ...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well we have to skip over all the constructors with the wrong number of parameters until we get to one with the right number of parameters.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IINM, that is not true;
NativeQueryConstructorTransformershould allow only a constructor with the same number of params, else anInstantiationExceptionwould be thrown, so no need to iterate?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's just not correct. Look at the code in
NativeQueryConstructorTransformer. It iterates over the constructors, looking for one with the right number of parameters, and ignores all the rest:There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, I was mislead by the exception message ...
Maybe it's somewhat confusing since it's possible for a resultclass to have several constructors with the same number of params as needed, but with different param types, and then you'd still get that message?
I'm just annoyed by the fact I initially had a perfectly good implementation including constructor iteration, and then I took that out thinking it was not needed, only for the lead Hibernate guy to come in after me and slap me on the wrist by rewriting my code. Fucks up my self-esteem in so many ways ...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Correct. The potentially-ambiguous case is where you have multiple constructors with the same number of parameters but different types.
I make mistakes all the time. I don't let it bother me.