In one application, I associate user accounts with computers based on usage of the computer. I have to both access the computers from the accounts and vice versa in many places in my code. Therefore I took the way to make it bidirectional using Add/Remove-Methods to assure that the association is really valid from both sides. In the same application, I have installation data mapped to computers. It turns out that the computers are almost never asked for the installations (there are separate software-computer and software-installation associations) so this is a unidirectional association from installation to computer. Because it is a many-to-one association, I could omit any special code and simply left it as a public property.
-Markus 2009/1/12 Mark Jensen <don...@gmail.com>: > > haha, yeah :P > > but do you have an example when this could be relevant :) > > On Jan 12, 3:59 pm, "Markus Zywitza" <markus.zywi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > So when would you consider to use bidirectional association ? >> >> When you need to access the objects via both directions. >> >> -Markus > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Users" group. To post to this group, send email to castle-project-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to castle-project-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
