• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: "extends EOGenericRecord" or "extends EOCustomObject"?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "extends EOGenericRecord" or "extends EOCustomObject"?


  • Subject: Re: "extends EOGenericRecord" or "extends EOCustomObject"?
  • From: Jonathan Rochkind <email@hidden>
  • Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 11:52:03 -0600

I actually think it's possible to have the attribute data stored in instance variables, even in an EOGenericRecord subclass.

The whole thing is very confusing. Near as I can tell, the only reason both EOCustomObject and EOGenericRecord exist as valid direct superclasses of your custom EO classes... the only reason is strange architectural legacies. There's no good reason for it, near as I can tell. Far as I can tell, EOGenericRecord is the reccomended superclass to use. That's what I always use. I can't quite figure out when, if ever, one would want to use EOCustomObject instead, myself.

--Jonathan

At 5:55 PM -0600 1/15/04, Ricardo Strausz wrote:
IMHO, the main difference is that, when you implement a customObject, you have the ``variables'' (atributes) at hand so, to access them, you do not nead to use the accessor methods; this is quite usefull if you are doing sofisticated logic. The main disadventage is that you have to take care of some of the ``magic'' provided by a genericRecord (like notify changes, so they can be spreaded).

I had not notice any adventage in performence (memory, time) while using customO instead of genericR.

Dino

On Jan 14, 2004, at 6:06, Kieran Kelleher wrote:

Is there anyone out there who is extending EOCustomObject for their java entity classes rather than extending EOGenericRecord?

What are the primary benefits to using EOCustomObject over EOGenericRecord subclasses for EO's?

Besides the extra hand-coding and higher maintenance of EOCustomObject, is there performance disadvantages (for example memory usage?)

Any advice is appreciated.

Thanks, K

____________________________________
OS X 10.3.2 / WO 5.2.2 / MySQL 4.0.16
_______________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________
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.

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: "extends EOGenericRecord" or "extends EOCustomObject"?
      • From: Ricardo Strausz <email@hidden>
References: 
 >"extends EOGenericRecord" or "extends EOCustomObject"? (From: Kieran Kelleher <email@hidden>)
 >Re: "extends EOGenericRecord" or "extends EOCustomObject"? (From: Ricardo Strausz <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Date attributes
  • Next by Date: Re: WOFileUpload: Garbage in file when uploading a html-file
  • Previous by thread: Re: "extends EOGenericRecord" or "extends EOCustomObject"?
  • Next by thread: Re: "extends EOGenericRecord" or "extends EOCustomObject"?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread