That's on the radar. I haven't made up my mind on it yet, mainly
because I don't want to add any more features to 1.2.
Andrus
On Nov 20, 2005, at 10:21 PM, Jeff de Vries wrote:
> While we're discussing this, I'd like to bring up again my request
> to have the option to have relationship names be based on the field
> name, rather than the destination class. So, for example, if you had:
>
> create table person (
> id int4 primary key,
> ... other stuff ...
> )
>
> create table sale (
> buyer int4 foreign key person(id),
> seller int4 foreign key person(id),
> ... other stuff ...
> )
>
> the relationships from sale to person would be called "toBuyer" and
> "toSeller" instead of "toPerson" and "toPerson1" (which is what
> happens now).
>
> Perhaps add an option to drop a trailing "_id" from the field name,
> so that "buyer_id" would map to "toBuyer" instead of "toBuyerId",
> or maybe use Adam's regular expression idea here as well to
> singularize names. So there'd be (at least) three options:
> 1. Use destination class name [what happens now]
> 2. Use field name
> 3. Use regular expression based on field name [to handle trailing
> "_id" etc]
>
> *** ALSO ***
>
> Add more information to the ObjRelationship Inspector window to
> indicate *which* field is being used for the relationship, so you'd
> see "sale(buyer) -> person(id)" and "sale(seller) -> person(id)"
> instead of just "sale -> person" and "sale -> person" (which is
> what happens now and makes it impossible to tell which relationship
> is being used).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff "Squeaky Wheel" de Vries
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Nov 22 2005 - 05:39:59 EST