But my plantSet object "is-a" cached object! Isn't it?
No, the cached object is an implementation detail, not core to what a plantSet is. That's why inheritance is not the right approach in this case: to change the caching strategy you shouldn't have to change what plantSet inherits from.
If I change plantSet to use an instance of the cached object, am I then doing what you typically suggest?
That would be better design: plantSet "uses" cachedObject.
I still think you're adding unnecessary complexity...If you think that's true, you obviously haven't seen what I had before.
*grin* I believe you...
Seriously, if I am, then I don't fully understand what you are suggesting is the better way to handle the data.
This whole thing about trying to replace an object with some cached version is the unnecessary complexity. If your plantSet is meant to be a Web Service, it should be stateless - have no instance data - and simply manage the cached data (in server scope, for example). No "this" scope stuff, no "variables" / unnamed scope stuff - stateless CFCs don't need that.
Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/
"If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive." -- Margaret Atwood
----------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe cfcdev' in the message of the email.
CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by Mindtool, Corporation (www.mindtool.com).
