Gavin King

> That could work, yes, but it brings up the question why `CriteriaBuilder` has two method flavors for the relational stuff for `Number` vs. `Comparable`. Yeah that's what I just...

> I don't think I agree that `Boolean` should even be treated as comparable (no matter what Java thinks). Actually this statement, which I made a long time ago, without...

> We absolutely want to be able to include a `boolean` in an `order by`. Fortunately `Boolean` is `Comparable` in Java, so there's no issue there. And for a similar...

@jwgmeligmeyling unfortunately operations like `where()` and `having()` and `CriteriaBuilder.and()` and `Case.when()` are currently typed to accept `Expression`, so the `Predicate` interface currently has little value. This was arguably a mistake...

Well, that would be a breaking change, so we can't do that. Also, to handle generics correctly, the method would need to return a `Type`, not `Class`. So it would...

I think you're underestimating this. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing _properly_. First of all, if we're going to have metamodel objects representing actualized versions of inherited members, the...

Not a single person here claimed that it cannot be done. The claim is that it would be wrong and inelegant to do so. As I've already said above, it's...

@archiecobbs I'm not sure I understand. Typically when creating a criteria query you will have an instance of `Root` or `Join` to work with, since there aren't any important methods...

@archiecobbs most of that `switch` is unnecessary, I believe, because `Join` is a supertype of all the other join types. So you only need two cases in the `switch`, I...

I mean, I gotta be honest: you're not really selling me on this. If the only real payoff here is to eliminate the need for a single one-line function: ```java...