Re: Entity Modeler Qualifier Bug?

From: Michael Halliday (michael.hallida..adiefleet.com)
Date: Sun Oct 28 2007 - 11:37:53 EDT

  • Next message: James Cicenia: "solved. Re: Feeling stupid about Frameworks..."

    Ah yes ... I remember the mention of the switched parsers!!

    Thanks Mike!!

    Cheers,
    Michael.

    On 28-Oct-07, at 6:24 AM, Mike Schrag wrote:

    > This was an artifact of switching to a different plist parser a
    > couple builds ago. I just committed a fix, so it will be in Monday
    > night's build.
    >
    > ms
    >
    > On Oct 28, 2007, at 1:21 AM, Michael Halliday wrote:
    >
    >> Hey List ( and more specifically Mike ):
    >>
    >> Just installed the latest nightly build (4560) with Eclipse 3.3.1
    >> and I've run across what appears to be a bug with Entity Modeler.
    >> Something seems to have changed which causes fetch spec qualifiers
    >> like this:
    >>
    >> (isActive = 1) and (isApproved = 1)
    >>
    >> to be converted on load to this:
    >>
    >> (isActive = "1") and (isApproved = "1")
    >>
    >> Basically quoting all values. It took me a while to figure out
    >> what was going on because I started getting the following error:
    >>
    >> com.webobjects.jdbcadaptor.JDBCAdaptorException: The attribute
    >> isActive should be assigned a Number, but the value was the String
    >> "1"
    >> at
    >> com
    >> .webobjects.jdbcadaptor.JDBCColumn.takeInputValue(JDBCColumn.java:
    >> 557)
    >> at
    >> com
    >> .webobjects
    >> .jdbcadaptor
    >> .JDBCChannel
    >> ._bindInputVariablesWithBindingsAndExecute(JDBCChannel.java:226)
    >> at
    >> com
    >> .webobjects
    >> .jdbcadaptor.JDBCChannel._evaluateExpression(JDBCChannel.java:303)
    >> at
    >> com
    >> .webobjects
    >> .jdbcadaptor.JDBCChannel.evaluateExpression(JDBCChannel.java:261)
    >>
    >> I downloaded some of the previous builds of the stand alone Entity
    >> Modeler and it appears to work correctly up until and including the
    >> build on Oct 17 ... the builds after this exhibit this problem.
    >>
    >> Any ideas?
    >>
    >> Thanks in advance,
    >> Michael.
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Oct 28 2007 - 11:39:07 EDT