How can I avoid adding "id" to my interface?

DanielSerodio · **Posted:** Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:04 pm

Is there some way to avoid adding an "id" to interfaces?

eg.:

Code:

public interface Employee
{
    public double getSalary();
}

public class SalariedEmployee implements Employee
{
    private Long id;
    private double salary;

    public Long getId() { return id; }
    public void setid(Long id) { this.id = id; }

    public double getSalary { return salary; }
    public void setSalary(double salary) { this.salary = salary; }
}

How can I associate with Employee, without polluting it with "getId()"?

Thanks in advance,
Daniel Serodio

kochcp · **Posted:** Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:55 pm

abstract class?

xflower · **Joined:** Wed Feb 08, 2006 3:57 pm **Posts:** 16

1. What do you want associate with Employee?
2. How would you like to identify the Employee?

jd001982 · **Posted:** Fri Jun 02, 2006 4:15 pm

DanielSerodio wrote:

Is there some way to avoid adding an "id" to interfaces?

You can skip the "name" attribute in the mapping and let Hibernate handle the identifier for you:

Code:

Then your class will look like:

Code:

public class SalariedEmployee implements Employee
{
    private double salary;

    public double getSalary { return salary; }
    public void setSalary(double salary) { this.salary = salary; }
}

DanielSerodio · **Posted:** Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:58 am

jd001982 wrote:

DanielSerodio wrote:

Is there some way to avoid adding an "id" to interfaces?

You can skip the "name" attribute in the mapping and let Hibernate handle the identifier for you:

Code:

Should I skip the "name" attribute for the class element, or the id element?

jd001982 · **Posted:** Tue Jun 06, 2006 3:08 pm

Quote:

Should I skip the "name" attribute for the class element, or the id element?

<id> element. Normally you'd have an id property for a class:

Code:

public class Foo {
    private long id;
}

with a mapping looking like this:

Code:

<class ....>
    <id name="id" column="FOO_ID">...</id>

But if you don't want the hassle of keeping an id property, then you do what I'd mentioned before, i.e. skip the name attribute in your mapping:

Code:

<class ....>
    <id column="FOO_ID">...</id>