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 14:47:06 -0700
On Apr 6, 2005, at 1:35 PM, Nat! wrote:
WebObjects 5 certainly requires that you inherit from
EOCustomObject; EOF 3 (in WebObject 4) in effect required that you
inherit from EOGenericRecord:
Well on the Java side maybe, but not in Objective-C.
Indeed -- mea culpa.
The EOEnterpriseObject protocol was implemented as a category of
NSObject. That said, I tended to subclass EOGenericRecord anyway
since it made the entity more flexible during early stages of
development...
The big picture issue remains, however, that Core Data is not the
same as EOF. It's clearly addressing a different problem domain
(primarily desktop applications with local files, as opposed to
enterprise-level client-server applications which is what EOF evolved
to address) and has a different set of constraints. Comparison with
EOF may be useful for historical interest -- and (primarily for those
curious at the moment but who don't have access to Tiger) to get an
idea of the likely architecture -- but thereafter it ends. I think
it's reasonable to assume that the engineers thought long and hard
about what problems they needed to solve and what trade-offs they had
to make. And about what they had learned from the past. What's
being delivered in Core Data is not, as some would appear to want to
suggest, a stripped down version of a previous product, but instead
an evolution that meets a different need...
If you happen to have used "earlier generations" and believe that
Core Data would benefit from features that are not present in the
release, then please file enhancement requests.
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