Skip to content

Loading…

DDC-3087: Entity code generation skip setters #3861

Open
doctrinebot opened this Issue · 9 comments

2 participants

@doctrinebot

Jira issue originally created by user flip101:

When executing orm:generate-entities to generated methods, do not generate setters when entity is readOnly @ORM\Entity(readOnly=true)

@doctrinebot

Comment created by cstea:

I would like to see this feature but at the field level: Maybe my entity has a timestamp property that is auto-generated (uses Timestampable). I want to be able to have a getter but not a setter. Right now if I doctrine:generate and remove the setter function, it is re-created any time i re-run doctrine:generate.

I would suggest having @ORM/readonly as an available setting for properties.

@doctrinebot

Comment created by @ocramius:

I think this use case is simply a customization that should be applied by coding, and not via the generator.

@doctrinebot

Comment created by cstea:

I have made the required edits and created a pull request:

#1052
http://www.doctrine-project.org/jira/browse/[DDC-3157](http://www.doctrine-project.org/jira/browse/DDC-3157)

In the case of the original request, users can use readonly on every property in the table if they chose to make the entire entity read-only.

@doctrinebot

Comment created by @doctrinebot:

A related Github Pull-Request [GH-1052] was closed:
#1052

@doctrinebot

Comment created by @ocramius:

See comments on DDC-3157

@doctrinebot

Comment created by flip101:

The PR by Christopher Stea adds a readonly annotation for properties. This ticket is about using the readonly annotation on the class (ORM\Entity) which is already in Doctrine. And just modify the code generator a little bit to skip the setters. Please reopen!!!

@doctrinebot

Comment created by @ocramius:

The PR introduces metadata used solely for the purpose of code generation.

@doctrinebot

Comment created by flip101:

Yes that's not what THIS ticket is about, so please reopen because the PR is related, but not at all a solution to this ticket.

@doctrinebot

Comment created by @ocramius:

Hmm, makes sense. Re-opening then.

@Ocramius Ocramius was assigned by doctrinebot
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.