Craig Miskell wrote:
> the sequence of dbrelationships. I then started thinking that maybe
> ObjRelationship should never have setToMany called on it, and the isToMany
> should *always* be derived from the underlying DbRelationship. However,
Good idea (as long as this recomputation is not done over and over again).
Anybody who wants to dynamically reconfigure ObjRelationships has to
fiddle with the DbRelatonships anyway. This is exactly what I was
referring to with my 'self-containing model' idea.
> this is a reduction in functionality, and knowing my luck, if I made such
> a change, it would turn out that someone is doing something nasty but
> valid that requires the ability to override the toMany flag on an
> ObjRelationship, regardless of the DbRelatoinship underneath.
Maybe just make setToMany protected? Oops there I go again :-)
> Any ideas if I'd get my head bitten off for munging with this?
not by me :-)
Holger
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Mar 04 2003 - 03:20:47 EST