On 1/15/08 4:41 PM, "Baz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now whats cool is how you solve the problem! You would actually have any and > all objects required for an Order.save() composed or somehow built in to your > ORDER object with the underlying premise that an ORDER should have ALL the > necessary tools to complete a save() no matter how complex that save is. And > you've said that so far you haven't run into any complexity that was awkward > to handle in this way. I'm just wondering if there are actually some > complexities that are better handled in the service and left out of the ORDER > object even though they are invoked during Order.save().
I¹m sure there are, and when I find them, no doubt I¹ll have to refactor! Luckily all seems to be going well so far . . . Best Wishes, Peter --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CFCDev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfcdev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
