• 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: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data


  • Subject: Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data
  • From: Cem Karan <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:08:50 -0500

Don't worry, it isn't confusing! The problem with multiple inheritance in this manner is that somehow we need to know which parent is the current effective parent (because otherwise you don't have a C union, you have a C struct). I think what may have to happen is that either I programmatically create a new object based on NSManagedObject that is a union, or that CoreData needs to be extended to encompass the concept of a C union.
Yea, I don't really think Coredata is very happy with "chameleon" entities that can be one or the other unless they are part of a hierarchy....
I think core data needs to be enhanced for this functionality, its not going to be too easy in any case currently.... to get a full union style behavior.

Unfortunately, I think you're right... the thing is, when I see CoreData & the modeler, what I see is a way of defining a grammar. The grammar that CoreData uses allows pure binary notation, but other than that it is a lot like EBNF (ISO/IEC 14977). Maybe some thought should be given to changing the modeler to have aspects of EBNF notation? Or maybe that would be better done by a third party tool that rest on top of CoreData...


So I think its safe to assume a collection of 4BN is plausible, though you'd probably run out of RAM first.... when 64-bit cocoa comes out, you can check the docs and do an #ifdef in case they add a method that returns long instead of unsigned...... I suppose.
Yes, I can see what you're saying. My hope was to avoid having different binaries. I think I can solve it via your solution, and abstracting much of the work into multiple frameworks though...
Hopefully apple will have a very clean solution to Cocoa/64 but it will probably have to be a hands-on approach for us to take advantage of it......

I hope so to, but I'm typedefing and #ifing everything I'm putting together, just in case! :)


Thanks,
Cem Karan
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


References: 
 >[REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data (From: Cem Karan <email@hidden>)
 >Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data (From: email@hidden)
 >Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data (From: Cem Karan <email@hidden>)
 >Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data (From: Andre <email@hidden>)
 >Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data (From: Cem Karan <email@hidden>)
 >Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data (From: Andre <email@hidden>)
 >Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data (From: Cem Karan <email@hidden>)
 >Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data (From: Andre <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Beating XCode's key buffer
  • Next by Date: Re: Beginner Questions (was no subject)
  • Previous by thread: Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data
  • Next by thread: Re: [REPOST] Data Modeler/Core Data
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread