undefined | Better HN

0 pointsgrey-area9y ago0 comments

Have you considered another mechanism apart from field tags for relating fields to the db (for example a function for marshalling?). It's starting to look like you're creating a dsl stuffed into struct field tags as strings, which gets ugly if it is complex. This is one part of go I'm really not keen on for this reason.

0 comments

aodin9y ago

In https://github.com/aodin/sol#sol I separated the table schema, which is a function, from the destination / receiver structs. This approach allows you to build tables programmatically and do condensed selections, such as all IDs into a []int. However, this process still has to match database columns to struct field names for most selections.

aacanakin9y ago

There is a table api in qb much like yours. See https://github.com/aacanakin/qb/blob/master/table_test.go. The session api converts tags into table object. I really like the column definitions. Maybe I can convert the definition implementation like you.

aacanakin9y ago

I'm also not happy to add tons of tags in struct fields. Can you provide an example on how to do that? What I understand is to have a function inside the struct namely like "map" and define the constraints there. I think we can do this in the next milestone of qb. Can you open an issue about this? The github repo is https://github.com/aacanakin/qb

grey-areaOP9y ago

I just use a function taking the row from the db in the model and creating the model from that. It avoids tags and reflection at the cost of some verbosity.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsgrey-area9y ago0 comments

0 comments

aodin9y ago

aacanakin9y ago

grey-areaOP9y ago

I just use a function taking the row from the db in the model and creating the model from that. It avoids tags and reflection at the cost of some verbosity.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse