RE: Tapestry integration options

From: Gentry, Michael \(Contractor\) ("Gentry,)
Date: Tue May 03 2005 - 11:19:51 EDT

Next message: Cris Daniluk: "Re: unit testing Cayenne objects"

Previous message: Erik Hatcher: "Re: unit testing Cayenne objects"
Maybe in reply to: Erik Hatcher: "Tapestry integration options"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Removing dead code is (relatively) easy and makes your code more
readable and easier to maintain. Win, win, win! :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Cris Daniluk [mailto:cris.danilu..mail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 10:15 AM
To: cayenne-use..bjectstyle.org
Subject: Re: Tapestry integration options

> That's exactly why we want nested DataContexts. :-)
>
> You do your wizard/multi-step process in a nested DataContext and if
> they finish the last step, you can commit it all. If they run off
> elsewhere, no harm done and it falls out.
>
I for one am going to have a lot of unnecessary workarounds and dead
code when nested contexts are ready :)

Cris

Next message: Cris Daniluk: "Re: unit testing Cayenne objects"
Previous message: Erik Hatcher: "Re: unit testing Cayenne objects"
Maybe in reply to: Erik Hatcher: "Tapestry integration options"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue May 03 2005 - 11:19:56 EDT