Hibernate 3.0 goes final

Discussions

News: Hibernate 3.0 goes final

Bookmark and Share Get thread feed

  1. Hibernate 3.0 goes final (36 messages)

    The Hibernate team has released Hibernate 3.0.

    This version of Hibernate adds a new HQL parser (when compared to Hibernate 2.1), as well as some EJB 3 features, a statistics API, dialects for Derby and TimesTen, and many other changes.

    Links:
    Reply to this

    Threaded Messages (36)

  2. Where is hbm2java for Hibernate 3?[ Go to top ]

    First, congratulations and great job!

    Second, I know there's been effort on the eclipse plugin work, but (speaking for myself), I prefer good 'ol vim + ant, and hbm2java is part of my build process. Just curious when we can expect a version of hbm2java that will work with H3. The reference documentation has been updated to mention org.hibernate.tool.hbm2java.CodeGenerator, but that's not downloadable yet (only the one that still depends on net.sf.hibernate).

    Personally, I question the separate package. I had previously voiced my opinion here:
    https://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=32172#159229
    and rebutted the response here:
    https://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=32172#159321
    However, right about now I'd be happy (and grateful) enough to get the new version however I can.

    Once again, though, thanks for the great product.
    David
    Reply to this Reply to original

  3. Where is hbm2java for Hibernate 3?[ Go to top ]

    It will be included in the next tools alpha release, which is already on the Eclipse update sites. We are preparing a standalone download.

    P.S. You have a better chance of being heard if you post to our forums.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  4. Where is hbm2java for Hibernate 3?[ Go to top ]

    Thanks, Christian. Until the standalone download is available, can you please post the direct Eclipse URL? I can't seem to find it...
    Reply to this Reply to original

  5. Where is hbm2java for Hibernate 3?[ Go to top ]

    Actually, the new tools release is being prepared today for the Eclipse update. So expect it this weekend or on Monday. I'll put an update on the Hibernate.org front page when we release.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  6. Java is pass by value[ Go to top ]

    Hey christian,

    Gratz for the 3.0 final release. I was reading you book "hibernate in action". I think it is a great book to read. However, in chapter 3, you stated java is pass by reference for objects and pass by value for primitive. I don't think it is correct. I am not trying to say bad things about your book and hibernate. I am a big fan of your hibernate. I just don't want it to mislead people who will read your book in the future.

    http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/javaqa/2000-05/03-qa-0526-pass.html
    Reply to this Reply to original

  7. Java is pass by value[ Go to top ]

    I'm glad I'm not the only one who gets cross about this kind of thing :)

    It's a major bugbear of mine. Fortunately most books get it right these days, but there are always exceptions. It's a shame when Hibernate In Action is such an *excellent* book in other respects!
    Reply to this Reply to original

  8. Java is pass by value[ Go to top ]

    It was a simplifaction made to help readers understand an anology. Also, some people already discussed this in the book forum: http://forum.hibernate.org/viewtopic.php?t=940107
    Reply to this Reply to original

  9. Java is pass by value[ Go to top ]

    It was a simplifaction made to help readers understand an anology.

    I think most Java programmers understand the difference...
    Reply to this Reply to original

  10. Java is pass by value[ Go to top ]

    It was a simplifaction made to help readers understand an anology.
    I think most Java programmers understand the difference...
    ... so why does it took almost 500 words to explain the difference in the javaworld Q&A?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  11. Java is pass by value[ Go to top ]

    "The method successfully alters the value of pnt1, even though it is passed by value; however, a swap of pnt1 and pnt2 fails! This is the major source of confusion."
    It looks like author is going to confuse himself.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  12. Objects passed by value --> :([ Go to top ]

    I'm very tempted to say "Get a life!", but maybe I'm missing something behind all this "confusion".

    I've always considered Java to pass primitives by value and Objects by reference and I don't think that is confusing at all. In fact, I've never even heard this was up for debate until reading this thread.

    I read the JavaWorld article that was posted on the Hibernate forums about this, and the example they gave was crystal clear to me. I knew exactly why the code worked the way it did, and yet I still consider Objects passed by reference and primitives by value.

    Is this incredible anality (yeah, that's a word) really useful to anyone?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  13. Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    Actually, I think both formulations are perfectly correct.

    It is certainly true that "references to objects are passed by value". That tells us the semantics by which the hidden pointer is passed. It doesn't actually say anything at all about how the actual state of the object is passed.

    And so it is also quite true that "objects are passed by reference". i.e. the object itself is most certainly passed as a reference. This is just another way of saying that it is the reference to the object that is the thing that is passed.

    So both:

    (1) references are passed by value
    (2) objects are passed by reference

    can simultaneously be true.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  14. Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    Omg, I can't believe you guys actually think java is pass by preference for objects. Maybe you need to go back to college and take the introduction for java class again..

    http://javadude.com/articles/passbyvalue.htm

    do some more google on "java pass by value" and read more explanation.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  15. Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    I was talking to Chris, not Gavin :)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  16. Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    I didn't write it, so you got the wrong guy for you little insult. But hey, I'm more used to it, so you're welcome :) Can we get back on topic?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  17. Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    I am not talking to you either, i was talking to chris M lol
    Reply to this Reply to original

  18. Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    I wouldn't insult you two. You guys gave me a free orm tools :)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  19. Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    Actually, I think both formulations are perfectly correct.It is certainly true that "references to objects are passed by value". That tells us the semantics by which the hidden pointer is passed. It doesn't actually say anything at all about how the actual state of the object is passed.And so it is also quite true that "objects are passed by reference". i.e. the object itself is most certainly passed as a reference. This is just another way of saying that it is the reference to the object that is the thing that is passed.So both:(1) references are passed by value(2) objects are passed by referencecan simultaneously be true.

    Yep.

    My point was that understanding this shouldn't be a challenge to those who have any reasonable amount of programming experience, which probably includes just about anyone using Hibernate.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  20. Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    Actually, I think both formulations are perfectly correct.It is certainly true that "references to objects are passed by value". That tells us the semantics by which the hidden pointer is passed.

    There is no hidden pointer - the pointer is always explicit.

    If objects were passed by reference then

    a.method1(null);

    wouldnt be a valid construct.

    Infact the only time an "object" ever comes into the picture is when member access takes place. For all other language contructs (such as assignment and parameter passing) its the reference that is explicitly manipulated BY VALUE.

    Paul C.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  21. Re: Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    Actually, that's not entirely true, Gavin. Passing by reference would allow you to change WHICH object the caller is pointing to...

    public static void someMethod( String param )
    {
      param = "Some other string";
    }

    public static void main( String[] args )
    {
      String s = "Hello, World!";
      someMethod( s );
      System.out.println( s );
    }

    If it were truly pass by reference, this program would print "Some other string" as opposed to "Hello, World!".
    Reply to this Reply to original

  22. Re: Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    Oh, and great job by the way Hibernate folks! Hibernate is a heck of a product! Love it! I really like Hibernate3 now that the checked exceptions have gone away. Much easier to code this way.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  23. Both are correct[ Go to top ]

    So both:(1) references are passed by value(2) objects are passed by referencecan simultaneously be true.

    and (3) objects in remote method calls are passed by value.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  24. Objects passed by value --> :([ Go to top ]

    Yes, there is a point to being this pedantic.

    "Pass by reference" semantics are very specific, and are different to "pass reference by value" semantics - in particular, changing the value of the parameter within the method has no effect on the parameter passed into the method. (Note that that's changing the value, which is the reference, not changing data within the object referred to.)

    Those people who *do* know what pass by reference really means can easily get confused when they are told that Java passes objects by reference. They expect the statement to be true, so try changing the value of the parameter and then get confused when their program doesn't work.

    There have been several people confused by this on the newsgroups (including the C# newsgroups - C# is like Java by default, with a modifier to make the parameter pass by reference).

    I agree it's a slight distinction, and one which *most* Java programmers understand anyway, but I still think it's an important distinction. It's a bit like correcting people who talk about ASCII values over 127 :)
    Reply to this Reply to original

  25. Hibernate 3.0 goes final[ Go to top ]

    The documentation links at hibernate.org for version 3.0 don't seem to work.

    BTW Do you have any plans to implement a plugin for NetBeans?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  26. Hibernate 3.0 goes final[ Go to top ]

    What links don't work? The links from this page are OK: http://www.hibernate.org/5.html

    About Netbeans: The new tools effort seperates core functionality from user interface, so a different interface is naturally possible. We would need someone to do it though, our goal is to get the Eclipse-based frontend final first.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  27. Hibernate 3.0 goes final[ Go to top ]

    This link:
    http://www.hibernate.org/hib_docs/v3/reference/en/html_single/
    Reply to this Reply to original

  28. Hibernate 3.0 goes final[ Go to top ]

    Hm, I get a good HTML documentation page with this link in three browsers from three different networks. Probably on your side.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  29. Hibernate 3.0 goes final[ Go to top ]

    Yup, it's a problem on my side. The links are fine
    Reply to this Reply to original

  30. TimesTen? What the %@#@$ is TimesTen?[ Go to top ]

    I've been a Java programmer since 1997, and I've never even heard of TimesTen before I read this article.

    Why hasn't the JDataStore dialect been added? JDataStore is a pure Java database that's been around for years. A development version is distributed FREE with one of the most popular IDE's, JBuilder. You know, the *free* one that has more than 25,000 downloads *per week*...

    I happen to know that the code for the dialect has already been written and submitted to the Hibernate developers (HB1423 and HHH-224)...

    So where the heck is the JDataStore dialect?!?
    Reply to this Reply to original

  31. You could always implement the Dialect yourself[ Go to top ]

    If the JDataStore Dialect implementation is so important to you, then you could implement one. I don't have the source in front of me but I don't seem to recall the Dialect classes being overly complicated.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  32. TimesTen? What the %@#@$ is TimesTen?[ Go to top ]

    It will of course be included if it works - when we have time to do it. Sorry, but our TODO list is quite long and everybody who desperately needs a dialect can get it from JIRA anyway. It will eventually be on top of the stack and get done.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  33. TimesTen? What the %@#@$ is TimesTen?[ Go to top ]

    TimesTen is a very important product for a lot of very large companies (see some of their customer here). It's not perhaps exciting from a Java developers point of view but it is a key player in the high performance database and grid scene, something I'm sure you're familiar with. I'd put serious money on the fact that these companies all use Oracle and/or other classic databases but TimesTen goes a hell of a lot further with their in-memory database/replication technology.

    TimesTen is not the sort of thing that's going to look terribly impressive on a desktop machine so that might be why they are not know to many developers but they are a big player when things become enterprise.

    -John-
    Reply to this Reply to original

  34. Well done![ Go to top ]

    Forgot to congratulate the Hibernate team, an excellent job on probably one of the most key technologies for the next 5 years.

    -John-
    Reply to this Reply to original

  35. HIbernate3 and jdk1.3[ Go to top ]

    Is it possile to use Hibernate3 with IBM jdk1.3? I changed hibernate2 source code a little to compile under jdk 1.3.
    Reply to this Reply to original

  36. HIbernate3 and jdk1.3[ Go to top ]

    Is it possile to use Hibernate3 with IBM jdk1.3? I changed hibernate2 source code a little to compile under jdk 1.3.

    Why did you have to recompile Hibernate for this? The jars as included in the distribution should run on JDK 1.3 out of the box...

    Juergen
    Reply to this Reply to original

  37. Basic question of why upgrading?[ Go to top ]

    I am in the process of developing a project using Hibernate 2.1. Great job by the way.
    I don't believe I have anything too fancy (using inheritance and associations). Apart from the goal of releasing software with the latests versions of dependent frameworks. Is there a compelling reason for me to go to the new version.
    From what I have read caching would be one of them.
    I would have loved to be able to use generics for my collections but I have seen it has been mentioned several times already, so no more on it.

    Thanks
    Reply to this Reply to original