Re: Modeling an optional to-one relationship
Re: Modeling an optional to-one relationship
- Subject: Re: Modeling an optional to-one relationship
- From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 11:04:15 -0800
On Jan 15, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Mark Ritchie wrote:
Hi Lon,
On 14/Jan/2010, at 2:21 PM, Lon Varscsak wrote:
heh, it's not. :) I also don't believe that sometimes having an
optional to-one is always a "thing to fix". However, I do understand
now that EOF doesn't handle this case much better than it did in WO4.
Personally, I like the way that EOF is handling the case. It works
for reading and it correctly warns you when you attempt to change
something that never existed in the first place. There is also
programatic access to detect the case
How are you doing this? Is it much different than the code I sent a
few minutes ago?
Chuck
before you attempt to saveChanges so you can gracefully handle
things before hitting a exception. However, each to their own! ;-)
Here's the example code which I was working with:
<Application.java>
Setup a new project with a copy of the Movies.eomodeld, change all
entity classes to EOGenericRecord, setup a database with the tables
and point the connection dictionary at it. It should be good to
go. Oh, you should also set the WOAutoOpenInBrowser false since
there's no point in opening the default main component.
Please let me know how this works for you!
Mark
--
Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific
problems.
http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden