From: Brad C. <bra...@wo...> - 2002-11-21 21:05:46
|
The identifier after the "from" does not refer to a table. Perhaps the = fact that your class was named MyTable in your example confused things a = little. As an example: from bar in foo.model.Bar bar is simply an alias for the fully qualified name, much like the "t" = in the following sql statement: select t.* from table t brad ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donnerstag, Juergen" <jue...@ed...> To: <hib...@li...> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 8:49 PM Subject: [Hibernate] Question about query language > > Would somebody please explain to me why it is necessary to define the table > name as part of the from clause, e.g. "from MYTABLE in class = eg.MyTable". > The relation between table name and java class name is already defined > within the XML mapping. "from MYTABLE" or "from in class eg.MyTable" should > be fine for 90% of all cases. I admit, the latter one looks ugly, = however it > should be sufficient. > > I have one more issue regarding the class name within a literal text. > Automatic refactoring, e.g. renaming the classes name, does not modify = the > class name within the literal text. Any ideas about that? > > regards > Juergen > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by: To learn the basics of securing > your web site with SSL, click here to get a FREE TRIAL of a Thawte > Server Certificate: http://www.gothawte.com/rd524.html > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-devel mailing list > hib...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hibernate-devel > |