Re: Core Data question
Re: Core Data question
- Subject: Re: Core Data question
- From: Chris Hanson <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 20:48:10 -0700
On Aug 10, 2008, at 8:37 PM, Graham Perks wrote:
On Aug 10, 2008, at 10:30 PM, Chris Hanson wrote:
you should not need to do a thing to ensure that the other is set
after doing the first. That's what marking relationships as
inverses means; Core Data will set them for you automatically.
Thanks for that Chris, I did not know that. Still, it doesn't harm
to set things twice.
Actually, it could add an extra undoable action. If you just leave
the inverse to Core Data, setting both the relationship and its
inverse will definitely be a single undoable operation.
Also, imagine you have some additional logic implemented in the
setters; that will be invoked twice. Obviously it should be safe to
invoke twice, but depending on the amount of work it does you might
not want it to be.
-- Chris
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden