Not sure why you want to use a collection class in this instance. Since you are binding to a grid in any case, why not just use a DataTable instead of creating the overhead of two classes (a collection class and the entity class)? What are you gaining by using the classes? The DataGrid handles the sorting regardless of the data source. It is also trivial to add and delete rows to a DataTable.
On 7/14/05, Mark Pawelek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -----Original Message----- > Subject: [AspNetAnyQuestionIsOk] Using a Collection Class instead of a > Dataset for persistent data ? > > > In use, the Collection will be bound to a Datagrid and I want to be able > > to sort the table on most of the columns. I also need to be able to add > > and delete items with ease. > > > > All I have is the example from Professional C# (1st ed.) pp 775-790, > > section "Strongly Typed Collection", > > Oops I meant Professional ASP.NET (1st ed.) pp 775-790 (ISBN: 1861004885) > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- Dean Fiala Very Practical Software, Inc http://www.vpsw.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AspNetAnyQuestionIsOk/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
