RE: [OJB-developers] various questions

[Chris G. <CGr...@de...>]

I figure I'll voice my $0.02.

> > 2.) some classes use an "m_" prefix for member variables,=20
> others don't. Is
> > there an "official" way? Personally I'd vote against them.
>=20
>=20
> Also historical reasons. The first OJB prototype was build=20
> for workshop=20
> with Java programmers with a C++ background. The "m_" made=20
> them feel at=20
> home... ;-)
>=20
> Of course it would be much better to have some kind of "coding=20
> conventions".
> But who is going to set them up?
> And once we have such a set of rules: who is going to apply=20
> them to the=20
> existing 370 OJB classes ?

One approach would be to come up with a set of conventions through a bit
of debate on this list, and then apply them as you come across
discrepancies in the current code.  Over time we'd move towards
compliance.

> You are right. We had some discussion on this issue an=20
> decided to use a=20
> IdentityFactory backed by a cache to minimize overhead for=20
> contruction=20
> of Identity object.
> Florian Bruckner started to work on this, but I don't know=20
> how far he got.
> Florian: have you finished this or did any unforeseen problems occur?

Go Florian! :)  This would make me very happy.=20
=20

Cheers,

Chris=20