Well, it can't be an ObjAttribute name because there's no guarantee the
PK will be available as an ObjAttribute. In fact, we generally advise not
to. +1 for figuring it out from the mapping, at least for the case where
there's only one attribute. Multiple attribute pk's would be difficult
without the current Map, in which case we need keys to identify which
attributes each value maps to.... arrghh.
Craig
On Sun, 11 May 2003, Holger [iso-8859-1] Hoffstätte wrote:
>
> I'm trying to reproduce Laszlo Spoor's flattened relationship bug and just
> realized that ObjectId takes the name of the DbAttribute instead of the
> name of the ObjAttribute. This is extremely surprising! I don't know why I
> haven't noticed this before, but shouldn't this be regarded as a bug? I
> mean when I have to know the name of the physical attribute when
> constructing an ObjectId, it violates the Obj/Db* layer separation. Maybe
> even the name of the attribute should be completely taken out, after all
> we already have the class/ObjEntity in question and can find the name of
> the PK(s) from the mapping.
> Thoughts?
>
> Holger
>
Craig Miskell
Programmer, Black Albatross, Otago University, New Zealand
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS d- s+:- a-->? C++++(++)$ ULXH+++$>++++ P+>++++ L++$>++++$ E--- W+++$
N+ K? w--- !O M-- V? PS--- PE Y t++ 5 X+++ R-- tv+ b+>+++ DI++++ D+ G+ e++
h--- r+++ y+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun May 11 2003 - 15:41:21 EDT