Re: Mapping multiple EOs to one table
Re: Mapping multiple EOs to one table
- Subject: Re: Mapping multiple EOs to one table
- From: Ricardo Strausz <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 15:07:03 -0500
On miircoles, agos 20, 2003, at 15:09 America/Mexico_City, Chuck Hill
wrote:
At 02:58 PM 20/08/2003 -0500, Ricardo Strausz wrote:
Sure! but in the parent are all atributes of both (all) childs...
The only thing to care here ---as far as my experiment goes--- is to
put the "common" logic in the parent object (I mean here, the logic
which makes sense when "seeing" the holl row at once)...
Does this makes some sense to you?
While it might work it sort of offends my sense of OO design. :-) A
big reason for sub-classing is refinement of behaviour. What you are
doing kills that. Yes, it will be OK if you always treat the objects
as the parent object, but then what does that achieve? If this does
what you want, fine by me.
But then, how is STM supposed to be managed?
I'm getting confused!
What does STM mean? I'm not familiar with that acronym.
Sorry!
Single Table Mapping
Chuck
--
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.