Re: Why is it wrong to have relationships without an inverse
Re: Why is it wrong to have relationships without an inverse
- Subject: Re: Why is it wrong to have relationships without an inverse
- From: Gordon Apple <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:11:19 -0500
- Thread-topic: Why is it wrong to have relationships without an inverse
I try to minimize my dependency on CoreData by using generic and
app-specific categories on the MOC. I also mostly use root entities, rather
than doing independent fetches. I had looked at other options, but
pragmatism won out, and I went with CoreData.
You mentioned MacApp. I was heavily involved in that for awhile and even
got into the credits. I don¹t know if you remember Bob Krause. When I was
running the developer sig at LA Mac Group, I had him down for a presentation
on his object database backend, NeoAccess. He had a version for MacApp, but
I believe he also had one for Next Step. I tried to get Apple, Inc. to look
into it, but I guess they decided to go with their Enterprise Objects to do
CoreData instead. I wish they would take another look and consider doing a
true object database engine using more of a CORBA-type interface, which, I
believe, was attempted by Taligent, before Jobs killed it.
On the original question asked in this thread, I have several similar
places where I use a root object to also persist an object selection in the
referenced collection. I could not see burdening the collection objects
with another inverse relationship, so I just let these dangle, and ignore
the compiler¹s complaints, because this is something that can usually be
recovered from if there is a problem.
On 6/22/13 2:00 PM, Michael Crawford <email@hidden> wrote:
> I don't use Core Data because it's not cross-platform. In my honest opinion
> no one in their right mind would bet their livelihood on platform-specific
> document formats, no matter what the platform. I used to be a Senior Engineer
> at Apple. Many of my best friends still work for Apple. But I remember
> Bedrock. I remember MacApp. I actually led the effort to specify an Apple
> Events Suite, along with a bunch of my employer's competitors. The Word
> Services Suite still works completely unmodified in Mac OS X, despite my
> having written the spec in 1992. Now try to find any mention of Apple Events
> in any of Apple's documentation. While one can use SQLite or XML for the
> storage, if the SQLite or XML documents are to be opened on some other
> platform, one would have to write all that code from scratch, without the use
> of Core Data. Instead for SQLite, I just write the SQL directly, and for XML,
> I use Xerces-C (actually C++) to create a DOM tree (Document Object Model) in
> memory, then serialize it to an XML file. The inverse process reads XML then
> creates an in-memory DOM tree. For large files, Xerces-C also implements SAX
> (Simple Architecture for XML), which uses callbacks for each item in the file;
> say for XHTML, one would have a <title> handler, a </title> handler, a <body>
> handler, a </body> handler and so on. It's more difficult to write Sax code,
> but it's far faster and uses far less memory than DOM. Mike
_______________________________________________
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