Here is how I phrase this atm in the topical guide:
[NOTE] ==== It is important to understand that generally speaking the phrase "access type" refers to a number of concepts: * Determining which fields/methods constitute a persistent attribute. * Indicating where to look for mapping annotations. * How the attribute (its value) is accessed at runtime For the most part, Hibernate treats all 3 as being the same. There are some caveats here, which we will cover as we go along. ==== On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Steve Ebersole <st...@hibernate.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Sanne Grinovero <sa...@hibernate.org>wrote: >> >> I don't argue with that, but the context of my example was "assuming >> my team has the convention of always putting mappings on properties", >> so in such a case I'd want to use the second. >> > > Like I said, I could really live with either interpretation. The sole > reason I lean towards #1 is the idea of consistency. If you start allowing > @Access(FIELD) on getters all of a sudden @Access(FIELD) has a different > semantic depending on where you find it (class versus attribute). > > As I am writing the topical guide, I am realizing there are really 3 > questions involved here: > 1) How do I determine what is (versus is not) a "persistent attribute"? > 2) Where do I look for mapping annotations for each persistent attribute? > 3) How do I access persistent attribute values at runtime? > > This is really where we all (and not just us...) have varying opinions. > Like you think (1) and (2) should be handled distinctly, whereas the rest > of us (iiuc) think that (1) and (2) should be determined via the same logic. > > Further, you see the (1)/(2) combo as distinct from (3). To you > @Access(FIELD) on the getter is fine because of this; there @Access(FIELD) > is merely identifying the style of runtime access. > > Not saying either is right or wrong. I just think it helps to better > understand where/why we all agree/disagree. Which ultimately gives us > better understanding in these discussions. > > > >> I really have no strong feeling against how you all think it should be >> or any spec wording, my only concern is what happens when someone does >> have a different interpretation or opinion. AFAIK today these are >> ignored: would be nice to eventually be able to strictly validate (for >> whatever decison you might take). >> >> I think that's important to be taken into consideration while you work >> on how Jandex reads things: to be able to provide strict validation, >> you will need to be able to read annotations from both positions. >> > > For sure. This is one of the things metamodel is striving to do better > than before in regards to recognizing and warning about misplaced > annotations that will be ignored. > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
