Re: ADC Core Data article
Re: ADC Core Data article
- Subject: Re: ADC Core Data article
- From: mmalcolm crawford <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 09:39:08 -0700
On Apr 6, 2005, at 3:36 AM, Mont Rothstein wrote:
One thing no one has mentioned is that EOF (Obj-C) didn't require a
specific superclass
and
On Apr 6, 2005, at 5:47 AM, Philip Mötteli wrote:
Am 06.04.2005 um 01:14 schrieb Scott Stevenson:
On Apr 5, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Philip Mötteli wrote:
Each entity definition in a managed object model requires the
name of the entity and the name of the class used at runtime to
represent that entity. By default, the class used is
NSManagedObject, but the class may be either NSManagedObject or
a subclass thereof.
I read that phrase 5 times. Is that really true? Only subclasses
of NSManagedObject get managed persistency from Core Data?
Trying to implement transparent persistence without a persistent
subclass is.... challenging.
We had it with EOF, including un-/redo.
In which version of EOF?
WebObjects 5 certainly requires that you inherit from EOCustomObject;
EOF 3 (in WebObject 4) in effect required that you inherit from
EOGenericRecord:
<http://developer.apple.com/documentation/LegacyTechnologies/
WebObjects/WebObjects_4.0/System/Library/Frameworks/
EOControl.framework/Resources/English.lproj/Documentation/Reference/
ObjC_classic/Classes/EOGenericRecord.html>
(I suppose that strictly you could implement the EOEnterpriseObject
protocol if you wanted, but it's difficult to see how that would be
preferable to simply changing your superclass.)
I don't remember prior to that.
I'll address other parts of the message later...
mmalc
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden