Re: JDBC 3.0 / JDK 1.4 build issues
От | Rene Pijlman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: JDBC 3.0 / JDK 1.4 build issues |
Дата | |
Msg-id | nep61usnapgmmlo6q7orjt1ccn528444fc@4ax.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: JDBC 3.0 / JDK 1.4 build issues (Ned Wolpert <wolpert@yahoo.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: JDBC 3.0 / JDK 1.4 build issues
|
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
On Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:31:51 -0800 (PST), you wrote: >Hm.... if we cannot reuse the org.postgresql.Connection abstract class, >then won't we need to have a org.postgresql.jdbc3.Connection class that >extends org.postgresql.jdbc2.Connection? Then will have to have the >Driver return the jdbc3 Connection when its called. Won't that work? Hangon, what would the definition of org.postgresql.jdbc2.Connection be in the new situation with jdbc3 classes inheriting from jdbc2 classes? It would still be: package org.postgresql.jdbc2; public class Connection extends org.postgresql.Connection implements java.sql.Connection Right? And that class won't compile with JDK 1.4 since it lacks new methods like setHoldability() of the java.sql.Connection interface. This raises a compile time error "class should be declared abstract...". And if we change the definition of this class to not implement java.sql.Connection, then the same code won't produce a proper implementation of JDBC2 with a JDK <= 1.3. I think there's a conceptual flaw in this scheme. Version 3 of the JDBC interfaces don't extend the version 2 interfaces, so I don't think we can solve it by letting jdbc3 classes extend jdbc2 classes. Regards, René Pijlman <rene@lab.applinet.nl>
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: