Re: An observation about custom EO classes
Re: An observation about custom EO classes
- Subject: Re: An observation about custom EO classes
- From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 11:35:20 -0700
I suppose you could if all you ever use is KVC. You would have to leave
the addTo... and removeFrom... methods. I'd not care to do this. I much
prefer to write name() in my code rather than
(String)storedValueForKey("name"). *And* if you ever rename something you
have to go through and edit all the strings. That is unpleasant. Better
to refactor it or at least have the compiler find all the places.
If you just want to unclutter your classfiles, the Generation Gap pattern
and eoGenerator are a better choice.
http://www.research.ibm.com/designpatterns/pubs/gg.html
http://www.rubicode.com/Software/EOGenerator/)
Chuck
At 06:27 PM 16/08/2003 +1200, Ray Ackland wrote:
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but since custom classes (created via
>EOModeller) are subclasses of EOGenericRecord, does that mean that you
>could delete all the non-customised methods from the code without
>affecting anything, as WO would just use the key-value routines
>provided in the superclass?
>
>Ray.
>_______________________________________________
>webobjects-dev mailing list | email@hidden
>Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-dev
>Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>
--
Chuck Hill email@hidden
Global Village Consulting Inc. http://www.global-village.net
_______________________________________________
webobjects-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/webobjects-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.